/  a^K4^ 


AN 


ELEMENTARY   COURSE 


BIBLICAL    THEOLOGY, 


TRANSLATED    FROM    THK    WORK    OF 


PROFESSORS  STORR  AND  FLATT, 


ADDITIONS 


BY  St  S.  SCHMUCKER,  D.  D. 

Professor  of  Theology  in  the  Theol.  Sem.  of  the  General  Synod  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  in  the  United  States,  Gettysburg,  Pa. 


Second   Edition. 


ANDOVER: 

PRINTED  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  GOULD  AND  NEWMAN, 

AT    THE    CODMAN    PRESS. 

NEW-YOKK  : 
GRIFFIN,    WILCOX    AND     CO. 

1836. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1836,  by 

GOULD    AND    NEWMAN, 

in  the  Clerk's  OflSce  of  the  District  Court  of  Massachusetts. 


i 


TRANSLATOR'S    PREFACE 


TO     THE     FIRST     EDITION. 


The  work  which  is  here  presented  to  the  public,  is  the  result  of 
the  joint  labour  of  two  of  the  most  eminent  divines  of  the  present 
age.  Theophilus  Christian  Storr,^  formerly  Theological  Professor 
in  the  University  of  Tiibingen,  was  a  very  distinguished  interpreter 
of  the  Holy  Volume,  and  one  of  the  most  triumphant  combatants 
of  that  fashionable  philosophy  with  which  Europe  has  been  deluged. 
His  numerous  philological  and  exegetical  works  rank  among  the 
first  critical  productions  of  Germany,  and  few  men  have  attained 
such  profundity  of  erudition,  and  at  the  same  time  preserved  so 
humble  and  faithful  an  adherence  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  as 
are  displayed  in  the  literary  and  theological  career  of  Dr.  Storr.  In 
his  earlier  life,  after  he  had  acquired  a  profound  and  critical  knowl- 
edge of  the  original  languages  of  Scripture  and  the  cognate  dialects, 
he  confined  himself  for  some  time  to  the  study  of  the  Holy  Volume 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  theological  works.  Accordingly  his 
various  productions  display  an  extraordinary  familiarity  with  the 
Bible,  and  in  reference  especially  to  Biblical  learning,  might  with 
truth  be  applied  to  him  what  Casaubbn  said  of  his  friend  the  great 
Salmasius,  that  he  was  ''  ad  miraculum  doctus.^^  Nor  is,  in  general, 
his  colleague  and  commentator  Dr.  C.  C.  Flatt  at  all  his  inferior. 
These  distinguished  champions  of  the  truth  sustained  the  cause  of 
orthodoxy  for  upwards  of  twenty  years,  and  published  from  time  to 
time,  the  most  able  replies  to  the  several  systems  of  infidelity  which 
sprung  up  in  Europe.  Having  been  harassed  by  metaphysical  and 
speculative  and  infidel  systems  of  pretended  Christianity,  they  were 
taught  the  absolute  necessity  of  building  their  faith  exclusively  on 
the  word  of  God  ;  and  the  present  work  is  purely  of  this  Biblical. 

1  Dr.  Storr  was  born  at  StUttgard,  Sept.  16, 1746.     Died  Jan.  17, 1805. 


IV  PREFACE  TO  THE  FIRST  EDITION. 

character.  It  is  confined  to  the  doctrines  which  are  taught  in  the 
sacred  volume  totidem  verbis.  The  various  inferential,  sec- 
tarian views,  which  are  used  by  divines  of  different  denominations 
to  complete  their  peculiar  systems,  are  here  omitted  ;  even  those  of 
the  Lutheran  church  to  which  the  authors  belonged.  The  work  is 
composed  with  the  highest  regard  to  exegesis,  composed  too  in  view 
of  all  the  objections  which  the  liberalists  of  the  last  thirty  years  have 
been  able  to  raise.  That  such  a  work  is  peculiarly  needed  in  the 
present  day,  must  be  evident  to  every  reflecting  mind  acquainted 
with  the  course  of  theological  discussion  in  our  country.  In  regard 
to  the  dress  in  which  the  work  is  presented  to  the  English  public, 
it  was  the  translator's  wish  that  it  might  appear  in  the  most  favour- 
able aspect.  This  he  endeavoured  to  effect  on  the  one  hand  by 
avoiding  that  servility,  which  whilst  it  hampered  his  diction  would 
render  the  work  offensive  to  the  classic  mind  ;  and  on  the  other,  by 
guarding  against  that  liberty  which  degenerates  into  unwarranted 
license,  and  deserves  the  name,  not  of  translation  but  paraphrase. 
In  the  management  of  the  work,  some  important  improvements  have 
been  attempted.  The  original  is  printed  thus:  first,  the  propositions 
or  text;  next,  notes;  thirdly,  notes  upon  these  notes  by  Storr; 
then,  notes  upon  all  these  notes,  by  Flatt ;  which  occasionally 
creates  much  perplexity  and  confusion  to  the  reader.  All  these  the 
translator  has  incorporated  into  one  continuous  and  connected  dis- 
cussion, consisting  simply  of  the  text  or  propositions  and  the  Illus- 
trations or  discussion  of  them.  The  extremely  numerous  references 
which  abound  in  all  Storr's  works,  are  generally  thrown  into  the 
margin.  Numerous  additions  also  have  been  made  to  the  body  of 
the  work.  The  most  important  of  these  are  the  translation  of  the 
very  frequent  quotations  from  heathen  authors,  from  the  earlier 
ecclesiastical  writers,  and  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  In 
some  instances  the  critical  reader  will  perceive,  that  improved 
translations  have  been  given  to  scripture  texts.  On  these  the  trans- 
lator spent  much  time  and  investigation,  and  it  is  hoped  his  decisions 
will  be  found  to  have  been  made  not  without  judgment.  Every  thing, 
also,  included  in  [  ],  throughout  the  work,  is  added  by  the  transla- 
tor. In  a  few  instances  in  which  the  learned  author's  enthymemes 
seemed  somewhat  obscure,  his  reasoning  has  perhaps  been  rendered 


I 


PREFACE  TO  THE  FIRST  EmTION. 


more  lucid  by  the  insertion  of  the  intermediate  link  in  his  chain  of 
reascming.  For  the  purpose  of  facilitating  references,  a  caption  or 
summary  view  of  contents,  has  been  prefixed  to  every  Illustration 
•  in  the  v^rork,  excepting  those  only  v^^hich  w^ere  so  brief  as  not  to  re- 
quire it.  The  occasional  original  additions  are  distinguished  by  the 
letter  S.  To  the  article  of  the  Trinity  an  appendix  has  been  added, 
in  which  an  attempt  is  made  to  prove  that  this  doctrine,  as  now 
understood  and  defended,  is  perfectly  accordant  with  reason,  and 
cannot  be  assailed  on  any  ground  of  true  philosophy. 

Having  undertaken  this  work,  as  he  humbly  trusts,  with  a  su- 
preme reference  to  the  glory  of  the  divine  Redeemer,  the  Transla- 
tor cannot  but  pray,  most  earnestly,  that  in  his  benevolent  Provi- 
dence, it  may  be  made  instrumental  in  the  promotion  of  the  interests 
of  his  kingdom. 

Theol.  Seminary,  Gettysburg,  1826. 


t 


VI  PREFACE    TO    THE    SECOND    EDITION. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND  EDITION. 


In  this  edition  the  frequent  repetition  of  literary  references  is  avoi- 
ded, whilst  no  work  which  had  been  cited  in  the  former  impression 
is  entirely  excluded  in  this.  A  few  paragraphs  of  minor  moment 
have  been  omitted  in  the  text,  and  the  whole  is  printed  in  a  more 
compressed  form.  The  work  is  again  commended  to  the  blessing  of 
God,  and  the  continued  favour  of  the  friends  of  radical,  biblical  in- 
vestigation. 

March,  1836. 


CONTENTS. 

BOOK    I. 

OF    THE    DIVINE    AUTHORITY    OP    THE    HOLY    SCRIPTURES. 

Page, 
A.     The  New   Testament. 

Part  I.  Of  the  genuineness  of  the  N.  Test.  §§  1 — 3. 

1.  Testimony  of  heathen   writers  respecting  the  early 

existence  of  the  writings  of  the  Christians,  §  1  17 

2.  Genuineness  of  the  homologoumena,  §  2         ...  24 

3.  Genuineness  of  the  antilegomena,  §  3  ....  61 
Part  II.  Integrity  of  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  §  4  .  .  .  88 
Part  III.  Credibility  of  the  N.  T. 

1.  Historical,    §  5       93 

2.  Doctrinal.— Divinity  of  the  N.  T.  §  6—12. 

a)    Jesus  himself  maintained  the  divinity  of  his  mis- 
sion and  doctrines,  §  6 102 

The  truth  of  this  declaration  of  Jesus,  is  established 

«,     From  his  general  character  and  conduct. — The 

plan  of  Jesus,   §    7 105 

p.     From  his  miracles,  §  8 109 

His  miracles  were  not  allegorical  narratives,  II- 

lust.    3 118 

— They  were  not  the  effects  of  human  agency, 

nor  a  work  of  deception,  lUust.  4 119 

— Not  the  result  of  an  accidental  coincidence  of 

circumstances,  Illust.  5 121 

— But  are  actually  proofs  of  his  divine  mission, 
Illust.  6 122 

b)     Jesus  assures  us,  that  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles 

also,  possess  divine  authority,  §  9    ...     .     125 


VIII  CONTENTS. 

Paul  possessed  divine  authority :  This  is  evinced 
by  his  own  declaration  in  connexion  with  the 
history  of  his  vocation  to  the  apostleship,  and 
his  miracles,  and  the  testimony  of  the  other 
apostles  in  his  favour,  §  10 134 

c)  The  writings  of  the  apostles,  also  possess  divine 

authority,  §  11 142 

d)  The  writings  of  the  evangelists  Mark  and  Luke, 

also  possess  divine  authority,  §  12       ....     146 
B.     Divine  aiithority  of  the  Old  Testament. 

1.  The  divinity  of  the  Old  Testament  is  proved  by 

the  declarations  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  §  13     151 

2.  The  O.  T.  contained  the  same  books,  at  the  time 

of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  which  it  contains  now  ; 
as  may  be  proved  from  the  N.  Test,  from  Jose- 
phus,  and  from  Philo,  §  14         165 

Inference  :  The  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  stan- 
dard of  our  faith,  §   15         .......     176 

Confirmation  of  the  divinity  of  the  Scriptures 
from  internal  personal  experience  :  inward  wit- 
ness of  the  Holy  Spirit,  §  16       18Q 

BOOK  II. 

OF  GOD. 

Part  I.  Of  our  idea  of  God  ;  and  its  truth. 

I.     Sources  of  evidence  for  the  divine  existence. 

1.  Even  conscience  points  us  to  a  God,  §  17    .     .     .     187 

2.  The  moral  nature  of  man,  connected  with  the  con- 

stitution of  nature,  necessarily  leads  him  to  the 
belief  of  a  Moral  Author  and  Governor  of  the 
world. — Combination  of  Physico-theology  with 
moral  theology,  §  18 191 

3.  Our  belief  in  the  existence  of  God  is  confirmed  by 

the  miracles  of  Jesus   and  his   apostles,  §  19     202 


CONTENTS.  IX 


II.  Biblical  idea  of  God — he  is  Creator  and  Governor 

ofthe  world,  §20 206 

III.  Attributes  of  God. 

1.  Power,  §  21 206 

2.  Knowledge  and  wisdom,  §  22 208 

'  3.     The  goodness  of  God,  and  its   compatibility   with 

the  existence  of  physical  evil,  §  23     ...     .     212 

4.  Justice  and  holiness,  §  24 214 

5.  Spirituality,  §  25      . 218 

6.  Veracity,  §26 219 

The  truth  of  the  Scriptures  is  a  necessary  conse- 
quence of  the  veracity  of  God,  §  27     ....     222 

7.  Unity  of  God — it  cannot   indeed   be   conclusively 

proved  from  reason,  but  from  Scripture  it  can,  § 

28 223 

8.  Eternity  and  immutability  of  God  :    inferred  from 

his  absolute  necessary  existence,  §  29     .     .     .     227 

9.  Incomparability  ofGod,  §  30 228 

Part  II.     Creation  and  Providence. 
I.     Creation. 

1.  Immediate  creation. — a)  Immediate  creation  out  of 

nothing. — b)  Immediate  formation  of  the  earth 

out  of  the  materials  already  created,  §  31     .     .     232 

2.  Mediate  creation,  §  32 236 

II.  Preservation  of  the  universe,  §  33 237 

III.  Government  of  the  world. — Providence. 

1.  Idea  of  the  divine  government — particular  provi- 

dence, §  34     239 

2.  Government  of  the  world  by  the  immediate  agen- 

cy of  God. 

a)  The  possibility  of  it,  §  35 240 

b)  The  reality  of  it — proved  from  the  miracles,  §  36  .     243 
Difference  between  miracles  and  other  instances 

of  the  supernatural  agency  of  God,  §  37  .     .     .    249 
2 


CONTENTS. 


c)  Necessity  of  admitting  the  possibility  of  the 
supernatural  agency  of  God  in  the  world,  in  ref- 
erence to  prayer,  §  38 250 

3.     Divine  government  in  the  course  of  nature. — Per- 
mission of  moral  evil,  §  39         254 

The  doctrine  of  divine  Providence  affords  no  jus- 
tification for  indolence  or  temerity,  §  40         .     .     258 
Conclusion  of  this  chapter,  §  41 258 

Part  III.  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

I.  The  divinity  of  Christ. 

1.  Its  proof,  §  42 260 

2.  Importance  of  this  doctrine. — Baptism  in  the  name 

ofChristastheSonofGod,  §43 291 

3.  Personal  difference  betvi^een  the  Father  and  the 

Son,  §44 295 

II.  Divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  his  personal  dif- 

ference from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  §  45     .     299 

III.  The  difference  between   Father,  Son,  and  Holy 

Spirit — the  nature  of  this  distinction  is  inexpli- 
cable, §  46 [301 

Appendix  by  the  Translator. 
On  the  relation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  to 

reason 306 

BOOK    III. 

OF  CREATED  RATIONAL  BEINGS. 

Part  1     Angels.     Connexion  of  this  Part  with  the  preced- 
ing, §  47 321 

A.  Good  Angels. 

I.  Their  existence  and  attributes — power,  moral  per- 
fection, and  happiness,  §  48 321 

1i.    Their  destination  to  the  service  of  God,  and  spe- 


CONTENTS.  XI 


cifically  to  the  promotion  of  the  welfare  of  men, 

§  49 323 

B.     Apostate  angefs. 

1.  Their  transgression  and  consequent  fate,  §  50  326 

2,  Their  relation   to  the   human   family. — They  are 

inimical  to  their  moral  improvement  and  happi- 
ness. They  exerted  an  injurious  influence  on 
bodies  of  certain  persons   in  the  time  of  Christ 

and  the  apostles,  §  51 328 

Their  baneful  influence  on  the  moral  character  of 

man,  may  be  resisted,  §  52 334 

Part  II.     Of  Man. 

1 .     Creation  and  fall  of  man. 

1.  The  creation  and  original  state  of  man,  §  53     .     .     339 

2.  The  fall  of  our  first  parents. 

a)  Its  history,  §  54 343 

b)  Consequences  of  the  fall,  §  55 345 

«)     Its  eflfects  on  our  first  parents  themselves,  lUust. 

1—3. 
/5)     Its  effects  on  their  posterity,  Illust.  4  etc.     .     .     .     347 

3.  Innate  depravity. — Description  of  it,  §  56     .     .     .     350 
— Its  consequences. — Of  death  and  the  state  of  ex- 
istence u'hich  follows  it,  §  57 353 

Future  punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  its  endless 
duration,  <^  58     .... 358 

II.      The  provision  made  hy  God  for  the  salvation  of  man. 

Christ  the  Saviour  of  man,  §  59 365 

1.     Description  of  the  happiness  which  is  provided  for 

man  through  Christ,  §  60 366 

a)  Happiness  immediately  after  death, 367 

b)  Happiness  after  the  resurrection  of  the  body  and 

the  transformation  of  the  earth,  together  with  the 
objects  connected  with  it,  §  61 369^ 


XII  CONTENTS. 

c)  Iinprovenient  of  the  blessed  in  intellectual  and  mor- 

al perfection,  through  the  influence  of  Christ  and 

the  circumstances  in  which  they  are  placed,  §  62     377 

d)  Different  degrees  of  future  happiness,  proportion- 

ate to  the  different  conduct  and  the  various  situa- 
tions of  mankind  in  the  present  life,  §  63     .     .     380 

e)  Their  participation  in  the  felicity  of  Jesus,  §  64     .     382 

2.  It  is  exclusively  through  Jesus  Christ,  that  we  ob- 

tain salvation.  He,  as  Lord  and  Judge,  bestowed 
on  men  that  salvation  wjiich  he  purchased  for 
them,  §65 383 

3.  This  salvation  is  intended  for  all  men,  §  66      .     .     389 

— But  not  all  actually  obtain  it,  §  67 392 

Little  children  also  are  saved  for  Christ's  sake,  §  68    394 

4.  Conditions  of  this  salvation,  and  means  to  attain  it. 

a)  In  general,  faithful  obedience  to  the  dictates  of  con- 

science, is  the  condition  of  salvation,  §  69     .     .     395 

b)  God,  from  the  beginning,  provided  for  the  propa- 

gation of  saving  truth,  §  70 396 

c)  Those  persons  who  have  not  received  a  revelation, 

and  live  in  strict  accordance  with  the  dictates  oi 
conscience,  will  nevertheless  be  saved  for  Christ's 

sake,  §  71 398 

But  the  salvation  of  those  who  have  become  ac- 
quainted with  the  revealed  will  of  God,  is  sus- 
pended on  the  faithful  use  of  this  divine  revela- 
tion, as  moral  agents,  §  72 402 

Salvation  is  not  merited  by  obedience,  §  73     .     .     403 
It  is  not  God's  fault,  that  some  men  fail  of  salva- 
tion,  §  74 403 

BOOK    IV. 

OF  JESUS  CHRIST,  THE  REDEEMER  OF  MEN. 

Part  I.    Of  the  person  and  different  states  of  Christ. 


CONTENTS.  XIII 

A.  His  "person. 

I.  Human  nature  and    supernatural  conception    of 

Christ,  §  75 413 

n.     He  is  united  with  God  in  the  closest  manner,  §  76, 

77 417,  419 

This  close  union  with  the  Godhead  must  be  presup- 
posed in  his  exaltation,  §  78 421 

B.  Of  the  states  of  Christ  {status  Christi.) 

L     The  object  of  both  his  states  is  the  accomplishment 

of  his  appointed  work,  §  79 427 

II.  His  state  of  humiliation. 

1.  It  consisted  in  a  diminished  influence  of  the  Logos 

on  the  man  Jesus,  §  80 427 

2.  Jesus  voluntarily  subjected  himself  to  this  state,  §  81     428 

3.  But  in  this  state  also,  the  influence  of  his  higher 

nature  was  manifest,  §  82 430 

III.  His  state  of  exaltation. — Resurrection,  Ascension 

to  heaven,  and  Dominion  over  all  things,  §  83     434 
Part  II,     Of  the  works  of  Christ  (his  offices.) 

A.  His  works  during  his  earthly  life — his  office  as   In- 
structor and  Mediator,  §  84 439 

I.  His  office  as  Instructor,  §  85 440 

II.  His  Mediatorial  office  (Priestly  office.) 

1.  In  general — what  it  embraces,  §  86 443 

2.  His  Mediatorial  office  on  earth. — He  purchased,  by 

his  obedience,  the  right  to  bestow  salvation  on 
the  human  family. 

a)  In  his  whole  life,  §  87 445 

b)  Especially  by  his  death,  §  88 448 

a.)     Remission  of  sins  is  the  chief  object  of  the  death 

of  Christ,  §89 449 

n)     Remission  of  sins  on  the  ground  of  reformation,  is 

not  the  object  of  the  Death  of  Christ,  §  90  .  .  453 
n)     Deliverance   from  the  punishment  of  sin,  is  the 


XIV  CONTENTS. 


immediate  object  of  the  death  of  Christ — his 
death  is  vicarious,  §  91 456 

3>)  The  doctrine  of  the  remission  of  sins  on  account 
of  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ,  has  a  salutary  in- 
fluence on  our  morality,  §  92     .     .     .     .     .     .     469 

b)  Other  objects  of  the  death  of  Christ,  are  either 
suspended  on  the  chief  object,  or  are  connected 
with  it,  §  93 472 

B.     Works  of  the  Redeemer  in  his  state  of  exaltation. 

I.  In  general ; — Jesus  is  employed  in  bestowing  salva- 
tion on  men,  §  94 477 

1.  The  prosperity  of  the  worshippers  of  Jesus,  is  a 

part  of  his  reward,  §  95 479 

2,  Jesus  promotes  the  welfare  of  his  people  by  virtue 

of  his  dominion  over  all  things,  §  96    .     .     .     .     480 

a)  He  bestows  salvation  on  them  in  the  future  world, 

§  97     .     . 481 

b)  He  prepares  them,  in  this  life,  for  the  blessedness 

of  that  which  is  to  come,  §  93 482 

II.    His  special  providence  over  the  christian  church. 

1.  Idea  of  the  christian  church,  §  99 484 

2.  Origin  of  the  christian  church. 

a)  Origin  of  the  church  in  general  under  the  special 

influence  of  Christ,  §  100     .     .     .     .     .     .     .     488 

b)  Origin  of  individual   churches  under  the   author- 

ity of  the  apostles,  §  101     490 

The  institution  of  the  ministerial  office  by  the  apos- 
tles was  in  accordance  with  the  will  of  Christ, 
§102 491 

3.  Preservation  of  the  church  by  the  continual  guid- 

ance and  protection  of  Christ,  even  amid  cir- 
cumstances of  adversity,  §  103,  104     .     .     492,  494 

4.  Mixture   of  good   and   bad   in   the   church, — No 

ground  for  secession,   §   105 498 


CONTENTS.  XV 


5.  The  genuineness  of  the  christian  church  depends 

on  the  purity  of  her  doctrines,  §  106     ....     501 
Hence,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  church  to  provide  ortho- 
dox  ministers,  §    107 503 

6.  Means  for  the  preservation  of  the  christian  church. — 
Sacraments,  §  108 510 

a)     Baptism. 

a)  Institution  of  it,  §    109 511 

^)    Baptism  in  honour  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 

Spirit,  embraces  both  promises  of  the  blessings 
which  are  bestowed  by  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 

Spirit,  §    110 521 

— and  our  obligations  to  God,  §  111 523 

y)  Infant  Baptism  is  proper,  as  it  is  undoubtedly  em- 
braced in  the  command  of  Christ,  and  has  accord- 
ingly been  practised  since  the  days  of  the  apos- 
tles, §  112         .525 

b)  Ofthe  Holy  Supper. 

a)     Idea  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  §  113     ......     531 

P)     Presence  of  Christ  in  the  Holy  Supper,  §  114     .     534 
Appendix  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  (by  the 
Translator) 545 

7.  The  influences  of  grace — (the  consequence  of  the 

special  providence  of  Christ  over  his  worship- 
pers.) 

a)  God  does,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Scripture, 

exert  an  internal  influence  on  the  mind  of  man, 

§   115 553 

b)  This  internal   influence  is  exerted  in   accordance 

with  the  laws  of  our  moral  nature,  and  among 
Christians  is  connected  with  the  use  of  the  in- 
structions of  God's  word,  §  1 16 558 


XVI  CONTENTS. 


BOOK    V. 

REFORMATION  OF  MEN,  AND  ITS  RELATION  TO  THEIR  SALVATION. 

A.  Justification  by  faith, 

I.  Explanation  of  the  proposition,     "We  are  justified 

by  faith,  §117 564 

II.  Faith  is  a  condition  of  our  salvation  which  is  per- 

fectly consistent  with  the  gracious  nature  of  our 
justification,  as  being  derived  from  the  free  grace 
of  God  without  any  consideration  of  personal 
merit  in  us,  §  118 570 

B.  Change  of  mind  and  reformation  of  life. 

I.  Reformation  is  the  effect  of  faith,  and  consequent 
on  it. 

I.  Faith  produces  an  exalted  idea  of  our  destination 

to  eternal  happiness,  a  loye  and  gratitude,  and  in 
every  respect  a  proper  disposition  toward  God 
and  the  Lord  Jesus,  §119 575 

^.     That  repentance  which  is  necessarily  combined 

with  true  faith,  produces  an  aversion  to  sin,  §  120    375 

3.  Faith  is  necessarily  connected  with  a  belief  of  the 
doctrines  of  Jesus  in  general,  and  with  obedi- 
ence to  them,  §  121 381 

II.  Reformation  is  a  necessary  condition,  though  not 

the  meritorious  cause,  of  our  salvation,  §  122    .     588 

CONCLUSION. 

Transition  from  Doctrinal  to  Practical  Theology, 
§123 590 


BOOK  I. 

OF  THE   DIVINE  AUTHORITY   OF   THE   HOLY 
SCRIPTURES. 


PART   I. 

OP  THE  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

SECTION  I. 

Testimony  of  heathen  writers  respecting  the  extension  of  Chris- 
tianity and  the  early  existence  of  the  religious  wntings  of  the 
Christians. 

It  is  evident  from  the  testimony  even  of  authors  who  were  not 
Christians,  that  during  the  reign  of  Nero  ^  and  the  period  immedi- 
ately subsequent,  the  Christians  were  not  only  augmenting  their 
numbers  in  Judea,  where  Christianity  had  originated ;  but  were  al- 
so extending  their  influence  into  other  countries(l) ;  and  used  cer- 
tain sacred  writings(2),  which  were  in  part  peculiar  to  themselves, 
and  difFerent(3)  from  the  more  ancient  religious  books  of  the  Jews. 

Illustration  1. 
Evidence  of  the  early  existence  and  multiplication  of  Christians. 

Tacitus,^  in  his  narrative  of  the  extensive  conflagration,  with 
which  Rome  was  visited  during  the  reign  of  Nero,  makes  use  of  the 

[1  Nero  flourished  A.  D.  54—68.     S.] 

[2  Caius  Cornelius  Tacitus,  the  intimate  friend  of  Pliny  the  younger,  was 
born  A.  D.  61  or  62.  He  was  appointed  to  some  of  the  highest  offices  of  honour 
and  confidence  under  the  emperor  Vespasian  and  his  successors,  and  was  con- 
temporaneous with  some  of  the  apostles.  In  addition  to  this  testimony,  Tacitus, 
in  his  account  of  the  incidents  of  the  year  of  our  Lord  57,  states  that  Pomponia 
GrsBcina,  a  lady  of  eminent  rank,  was  accused  of  what  he  terms  a  foreign  super- 
stition {superstitionis  externa),  which,  as  Lipsius  (ad  locum)  observoB,,  WM  very 
probably  the  Christian  religion.    S.]  Ba««etl«i 

3 


18  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

following  language  ; — "  Nero,"  in  order  to  avert  the  suspicion  that 
the  city  had  been  set  on  fire  by  his  private  command,  "  inflicted  the 
most  studied  tortures  upon  a  class  of  persons,  odious  for  their  vices, 
and  known  among  the  populace  by  the  name  of  Christians.  This 
name  was  derived  from  Christ,  who  was  executed  by  Pontius  Pi- 
late the  procurator,  during  the  reign  of  Tiberius.  But  this  perni» 
cious  superstition,  which  was  suppressed  at  the  time,  again  burst 
forth  and  pervaded  not  only  Judea,  where  the  evil  had  commenced, 
but  also  the  city  itself,  the  place  in  which  every  thing  that  is  shame- 
ful concentrates,  and  every  thing  atrocious  is  practised. "^ 

The  testimony  of  Suetonius^  is  very  brief,  and  couched  in  the 
following  words  ; — "  Punishments  were  inflicted  on  the  Christians, 
a  race  of  men  addicted  to  a  new  and  magical  superstition."^ 

1  "Quaesitissimis  poenis  affecit,  quos  per  flajjitia  invisos,  vulgus  Christianas 
appellabat.  Auctor  nominis  ejus  Christus,  qui,Tiberio  imperitante,  per  procu- 
ratorein  Pontium  Pilatum  supplicio  afFectus  erat.  Repressaque  in  praesens  ex- 
citiabilis  superstitio  rursus  erumpebat,  non  modo  per  Judaeam,  originem  ejus  mali, 
sed  per  urbem  etiam,  quo  cuncta  undique  atrocia  aut  pudenda  confluunt,  cele- 
branturque."     Annales,  XV.  c.  44. 

[2  Cuius  Suetonius  Tranquillus,  a  Roman  biographer  and  historian,  flourished 
in  the  reigns  of  Trajan  and  Adrian.  He  was  most  probably  born  about  the  be-  ' 
ginning  ol'  the  reign  of  Vespasian  a.  d.  70.  This  writer  also  states  that  between 
the  years  a.  d.  41  and  45,  Claudius  the  emperor,  "Judseos  impulsore  Chresto  as- 
sidue  tumultuantes  Roma  expulit,"  i.  e.  he  banished  the  Jews  from  Rome,  who 
were  continually  making  disturbances,  Chrestus  being  their  leader, — that  is,  as 
Grotius  states,  on  account  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ.  For  both  Tertullian  (Ap. 
c.  3.)  and  Lactantius  (Div.  Inst.  L.  4.  c.  7.)  state  that  the  heathen  pronounced 
the  Saviour's  name  CAresfus;  and  Dr.  Lardner  (Works  vol.  7.  p.  266)  remarks 
"  it  is  not  impossible  that  the  Jewish  enmity  against  those  of  their  own  country 
or  others  who  had  embraced  Christianity,  might  produce  some  disputes  and  dis- 
turbances which  came  to  the  emperor's  ear."  Yet  it  must  be  confessed  that 
Orosius,  of  the  fifth  century,  was  in  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  this  passage.  S.] 

[3  To  this  version  of  the  word  malcjicae,  the  translator  is  aware  that  some  ob- 
jection can  be  made.  Its  more  commonly  received  signification  is  pernicious, 
mischievous ;  and  thus  it  has  been  rendered  in  the  passage  before  us  by  the  learn- 
ed and  excellent  Lutheran  divine.  Dr.  Mosheim.  According  to  either  version, 
the  passage  proves  indisputably  the  fact  in  support  of  which  it  is  adduced.  The 
version  adopted  has  however  these  advantages  ;  it  not  only  proves  that  Sueton- 
ius was  acquainted  with  the  new  sect  called  Christians,  but  it  farther  evinces 
the  falsity  of  the  insinuation  which  the  unbelieving  Gibbon  advanced  to  inval- 
idate the  evidences  of  Christianity,  viz.  that  the  great  historians  ot  the  day  have 
taken  no  notice  of  the  pretended  miracles  of  the  first  Christians,  &c.  For  this 
passage  of  Suetonius  proves  that  he  had  heard  of  those  miracles,  although  hav- 
ing for  obvious  reasons  not  examined  the  evidence  of  their  truth,  he  ascribed 
them  to  a  magical  superstition.  This  translation  is  adopted  by  Dr.  W^atson, 
Lardner,  and  many  other  men,  and  in  support  of  his  opinion  the  learned  Bishop 
of  LandafF  says — "  The  Theodosian  Code  must  be  my  excuse  for  dissenting  from 
such  respectable  authority;  in  IX  Cod.  Theod.  Tit.  XVI.  we  read;  '  Chaldaei, 
ac  Magi,  et  ceteri  quos  vulgus  malejicos  ob  facinorum  multitudinem  appellat — Si 
quis  magus  vel  magicis  contaminibus  adsuetus  qui  vialeficus  vulgi  consuetudine 
nuncupatur.'  Nor  ought  any  friend  of  Christianity  to  be  astonished  or  alarmed 
at  Suetonius'  applying  the  word  magical  to  the  Christian  religion  ;  for  the  mir- 
acles wrought  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  principally  consisted'in  alleviating  th« 
distresses,  by  curing  the  obstinate  diseases,  of  human  kind;  and  the  proper 


^  1.]  TESTIMONY  OP  PLINY,  ETC.  19 

And  Pliny ,^  in  his  well  known  epistle,  makes  the  following  re- 
marks, which  prove  the  extensive  diffusion  of  Christianity  ; — "  Many 
of  every  age,  and  every  rank,  and  even  of  both  sexes,  have  been 
accused,  and  will  be  accused.  Nor  has  this  contagious  superstition 
pervaded  only  the  cities,  but  it  has  ako  spread  through  the  towns 
and  country."^ 

The  reader  may  consult  Haversaat's  Vindication  of  Pliny's  Epis- 
tles concerning  the  Christians,  against  the  objections  urged  by 
Semler. 

[The  testimony  of  Josephus,^  the  celebrated  Jewish  historian, 
from  the  universally  acknowledged  veracity  of  his  character  and  the 
fact  that  he  was  contemporaneous  with  the  apostles,  is  of  the  utmost 
importance.  As  the  biblical  student  in  America  cannot  always  have 
access  to  the  original  work  of  Josephus,  we  will  insert  the  celebra- 
ted passage  entire,  and  add  to  it  a  translation. 

riveTcit  de  xara  tovtov  tov  yqovov  'h]Oovg  tig,  aoq)og  ocv7Jg,  eiyi 
avdga  avzop  \iyuv  iqyi,  * Hv  yag  napadoi^wv  Igycov  TxotrjTtjg,  dMa- 
xalog  dvd^Q(an(ji}if  t(ov  gvv  iqdovfj  TuXrj&rj  ds^^o^tvMV.  Kal  n  o  X- 
lovg  f.itv  'lovduiovg,  noKlovg  d  l  xal  'EXXtiv  lyiovg 
tnriy  ay  tjo.  'O  Xq  icr  6  g  ovt  og  tj  v.  Kal  aiJroV  ii/del^£i 
Twv  nQ(uT(f)v  dvdQMP  nag'  i](uv  atavgrn  inuigjjxotog  IJiXatov,  ovk 
inavaavTO  oiye  auroV  dyan^aavTag.  ^Ecpdvri  ydg  avxolg  rgijfjv  i'x^v 
7jf.itgav  ndXvv  ^mv,  xmv  -d^siatv  ngocftjtmv  ravxd  t€  Kal  dkXa  fivgla 
havfidata  nsgl  avxov  etgrjKOtwv.  Elg  itv  ts  vvv  tcov  XgiGviavojp, 
dno  Tovde  (ovofiaafiivcov,  ouh  tnilmi  to  (fvXov.  Lib.  XVIII.  Antiq. 
Judaic,  cap.  III.  3. 

"  Now  there  lived  about  this  time,  a  certain  Jesus,  a  wise  man,  if 


meaning  of  magic,  as  understood  by  the  ancients,  is  a  higher  and  more  holy 
branch  of  the  art  of  healing."  Flatt  also  in  his  Annotationes  ad  Philosophi- 
am  Kantii  &c.  says,  that  this  testimony  of  Suetonius  undoubtedly  does  author- 
ize the  inference,  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  must  have  been  his- 
torically true.  S.] 

"  Afilicti  suppliciis  Christiani,  genus  hominum  superstitionis  novae  ac  mal- 
eficae."     Nero,  c.  16. 

[1  Caius  Plinius  Caecilius  Secundus  was  born  A.  D.  61  or  62.  He  enjoyed 
the  particular  friendship  of  Trajan,  who  made  Jaim  consul.  His  celebrated  letter, 
from  which  the  extract  in  the  text  is  taken,  was  written  a.  d.  107.  It  is  the 
testimony  of  one  of  the  most  enlightened  men  of  that  age,  which  establishes  the 
important  facts,  that  the  ground  oftbe  persecution  against  the  Christians  in  Pon- 
tus  and  Bithynia  was,  that  they  drew  men  away  from  the  worship  of  their  dei- 
ties; that  in  less  than  seventy  years  after  the  disciples  first  preached  Jesus  to 
the  gentiles,  Christians  abounded  in  Pontus  and  Bithj'nia  to  such  a  degree,  that 
the  heathen  temples  were  visibly  neglected,  and  their  remaining  friends  began 
to  fear  "  whereunto  this  thing  would  grow  ;"  that  they  were  in  general  remark- 
ably constant  in  their  profession  ;  and  many  other  facts  of  the  deepest  interest 
to  the  Christian  heart.     S.] 

2  "  Multi  omnis  aetatis,  omnis  ordinis,  utriusquc  sexus  etrnm,  yocantur  in 
periculum  et  vocabuntur.  Neque  enim  civitates  tantnm,  sed  vicos  etiam,  atque 
agros,  superstitionis  istius  contagio  pervagata  est."     Lib.  X.  ep.  97. 

3  [Josephus  was  born  a.  d.  37,  died  93.] 


20  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK, 


indeed  it  is  proper  to  call  him  a  man.  For  he  performed  many 
wonderful  works  :  he  was  an  instructor  of  those  persons  who  receiv- 
ed the  truth  with  willingness.  He  induced  many  to  become  his  fol- 
lowers, as  well  among  the  Jews  as  also  among  the  Gentiles.  This 
was  the  Christ.  And  when  on  the  accusation  of  our  principal  men, 
Pilate  condemned  him  to  the  cross,  these  did  not  cease  to  love  him. 
For  he  appeared  to  them  again,  alive,  on  the  third  day  ;  the  divine 
prophets  having  foretold  these  and  a  myriad  of  other  wonderful 
things  concerning  him.  And  even  at  the  present  time  the  tribe  of 
Christians,  so  denominated  from  him,  still  subsists."*     S.] 

III.  2.  Evidence  that  the  Christians  had  sacred  writings, 

Michaelis,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,^  quotes 
from  Lucian's^  work  De  Morte  Peregrini,'*  the  words  which  re- 
fer to  this  subject ;  twv  ^iffXcav  rag  ^6v  e^tiyeno  xa*  di6aaq>ic  Hi- 
Qtygivogj  i.  e.  Peregrinus  explained  and  illustrated  some  of  their 
books  ;  and  he  is  of  opinion  that  the  writings  here  alluded  to,  may 
hav6  been  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Hebrew  gospel 
of  Matthew ;  because  this  passage  of  Lucian  refers  to  Nazarene 
Christians,  who  were  resident  in  Palestine,  [and  who  are  known  to 
have  received  these  books.] 

1li«  3.  Evidence  that  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Christians  were 
in  part  different  from  the  more  ancient  boolcs  of  the  Jews, 

Celsus,^  a  writer  of  the  second  century,  in  his  work  against  the 
Christians,  not  only  assails  Moses  and  the  prophets,  whom  he  knew 
the  Gnostic  sect  of  Christians  rejected ;  but  he  also  introduces  a 
Jew  as  disputing  with  the  Christians  out  of  their  own  books,  and 
makes  the  Jew  conclude  his  disputation  with  the  following  words  ; — 
ravta  filv  ovv  vfiiv  ix  rmv  v^ixiQMv  ovyygaf4fiaTOiVf  i(p'  oTg  ovdevog 
aklov  fiugtifgog  X9^(^0fifv'  ccvioi  ydg  iaviovg  TUQinlmiJi  *  i.  e.  all 
these  objections  are  derived  from  your  own  writings,  besides  which 
we  need  no  additional  evidence,  for  you  confute  yourselves. 

From  the  quotations  made  by  Origen  from  Celsus,  it  is  apparent 

1  [The  authenticity  of  this  passage  is  ably  vindicated  by  C.  G.  Bretschneider, 
Parerg.  ad  Capita  Theol.  Jiidaeorum  dogmaticae  e  Fl.  Josephi  seriptis  collecta;. 
—translated  and  printed  in  the  Christian  Spectator  for  March  1825.     S.] 

2  Third  edit.  p.  40.  4th  edit.  p.  41. 

3  [Lucian  was  a  native  of  Samosata  in  Syrm,  and  flourished  about  176.J 

4  C.  11. 

5  [Celsns  was  contemporaneous  with  Lucian  (17G).  In  reply  to  his  work 
against  Christianity,  Origen  at  the  request  of  his  friend  Ambrose,  wrote  his  ex- 
cellent Apology  for  Christianity ,  about  A.  D.  524()  or  249.     S.] 

*  Origines  contra  CeUum,  Lib.  II.  §  74. 


1.]  EARLt  EXISTENCE  OF  THE  N.  TEST.  21 

at  the  Christian  writings,  to  which  Celsus  alluded  in  the  passage 
10 ve  quoted,  contained  a  biography  of  Jesus  :  for  the  Jew  whom 
!  introduces  is  represented^  as  addressing  Jesus  himself,  and  urg- 
g  the  following  accusations  :  "  that  his  pretensions  to  being  born 
a  virgin  were  false  ;  that  he  was  born  in  Judea  of  an  indigent 
male,  who  was  the  wife  of  a  carpenter,  and  had  been  convicted 
adultery  and  discarded  by  her  husband,  and  who  gave  birth  to  Jesus 
she  was  wandering  about ;  that  poverty  compelled  him  too  seek 
iployment  in  Egypt,  where  he  became  skilled  in  Egyptian  ne- 
omacy  (dvvafAeig)  ;  and  that  being  inflated  with  his  magical  at- 
inments,  on  his  return  to  his  native  land,  he  called  himself  God." 
It  is  evident  from  the  objections  advanced  by  Celsus,  that  our 
ur  Gospels  formed  a  part  of  the  sacred  books  used  by  the  Chris- 
ms when  he  wrote  against  them  ;  for  some  of  those  objections  have 
reference  individually  to  each  of  the  evangelists,  and  others  are 
irived  from  a  comparison  of  the  four. 

Thus  Origen  says,  '^  And  after  these  things  he  recurs  to  what 
llowed  the  birth  of  Jesus — to  the  narrative  of  the  star  and  of  the 
agians  who  came  from  the  east."^  And  it  is  well  known,  that 
e  account  of  the  star  and  of  the  Magians  from  the  east  is  found 
ily  in  Matthew^.  In  other  passages  of  the  work  just  cited,^  Christ 
himself  termed  TtxiMv  i.  e.  carpenter,  an  appellation  given  him 
ily  in  the  gospel  of  Mark  6  :  3  ova  ovxog  iaxw  6  tixttov;  i.  e. 
not  this  the  carpenter,  etc.  Again  he  remarks — "  Celsus  says 
at  those  display  a  great  deal  of  presumption  who  trace  the  lin- 
ge  of  Christ  from  the  first  progenitor  of  the  human  family,  and 
)m  the  Jewish  kings  ;'"* — and  this  is  done  no  where  but  in  the 
nealogy  of  Luke  3  :  38.  Again,  the  same  writer  says,^  "  Cel- 
s  reproaches  the  Christians  for  pretending  that  the  Son  of 
od  is  the  koyog  or  word  (avzoXoyog),  which  is  an  evident  re- 
rence  to  John  1:1.  A  case  of  an  objection  derived  from  a 
mparison  of  the  four  evangelists,  is  that  in  which  he  accuses  the 
storians  of  Christ  of  contradicting  one  another,  ivavxla  ocplat 
^vdiaOat^  and  he  adduces,  as  an  example,  the  several  accounts 
the  resurrection   of  Christ,  some  mentioning  one  and  the  others 


I  Origen.  loc.  cit.  Lib.  1.  §  28. 

^  Kai  fina  xctvta  avaxQfx^i  inl  to  e^ijg  xfj  ytvitrn  Toi5  'irjaov  avayeygafi- 
vov — TO  mgl  xov  uvrxigog  dii^yrjfia  xal  xtav  ikrjXv-d^oxfav  uno  avotxoXrig  fnayary, 
b.  I.  contra  Celsum  §  40. 

3  Lib.  VI.  §§  34,36,37. 

*   '!>rj(rl  (sc.  KiXtrog)  unrjv&adij(r&m  xovg  ytPfaXoy7]aavxug  ano  tov  ngmov 
Jvxog  xul  tMv  iv  'lovdaiolg  ^aadiwv  xov  'Xt]aovv.  Lib.  11.  §  32. 
•iLib.  II.  §3L 


22  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK, 


two  angels  as  having  come  to  the  grave  and  spoken  to  the  women.* 
This  is  a  reference  to  Matt.  28 :  5.  Mark  16 :  5.  Luke  24 :  4. 
John  20 :  12.2 

But  Celsus'  knowledge  was  not  confined  to  the  gospels  ;  it  is  ev- 
ident that  he  was  likewise  acquainted  with  the  other  writings 
(auyYQa^tfittta)  of  the  Christians.  This  is  evinced  by  a  passage^ 
of  that  writer,  in  which  he  is  assailing  the  words  of  the  Saviour : 
"  there  shall  arise  false  Christs  and  false  prophets  and  shall  perform 
great  signs  and  miracles.'''*  He  there  endeavors  to  prove  from 
them  that  the  miracles  of  Christ  are  not  divine,  and  adds  :  xai 
2ttjuvv(.v  tiva  ToiavTa  7ragufArjxccv(Ofi7]Por  ovofia^it  i.  e.  Jesus  men- 
tions a  certain  Satan  who  should  also  perform  such  miracles.  Now 
neither  in  the  above  passage  relative  to  the  *'  false  Christs,"  nor 
in  any  other,  is  there  any  such  assertion  contained  as  Celsus 
attributes  to  Christ.  But  in  Rev.  12  :  13,  the  power  of  working 
delusive  miracles  is  ascribed  to  Satan,  6  dgaiiwv.  And  as  this  book 
professes  to  be  "  the  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ,"^  Celsus  may  have 
alluded  to  this  text,  and  therefore  have  ascribed  it  to  Jesus.  But 
as  Celsus  frequently  attributed  to  Christ  whatever  he  found  in  the 
writings  of  his  disciples  f  it  is  more  probable  that  he  alluded  to  the 
passage  of  the  apostle  Paul,  2  Thess.  2:  9.  And  this  is  the  more 
plausible,  as  he  in  another  place,  while  speaking  of  the  power  of 
Satan  to  perform  delusive  miracles,  quotes  the  passage  above  refer- 
red to  relative  to  Sataij,  and  in  connexion  with  it  uses  the  following 
words  which  very  much  resemble  the  context  of  2  Thess  2  :  9. — 
"  The  Son  of  God  apprised  his  followers  that  Satan  would  make 
his  appearance  in  a  manner  similar  to  his  own  '  coming,'  that  he 
would  arrogate  to  himself  the  glory  of  God,  and  display  great  and 
marvellous  works,  to  which  however  they  should  pay  no  atten- 
tion, but  determinately  rejecting  them  should  believe  in  him  (Jesus) 
only."?     Comp.  2  Thess.  2 :  4,  11,  12,  13. 

Other  traces  of  allusions  to  several  epistles  of  Paul  in  the  writings 
of  Celsus,  are  pointed  out  by  Hug  in  his  Introduction  to  the  New 
Testament."^ 


^  Kal  fii]V  ngig  tov  amov  tovtiB  jucpov  il-&uv  ay/sXov,  ol  (jlsv  sva,  ol  de 
dvo  {Isyovat,)  rovg  ocTioxQivo^ivovg  tkIj  yvval^iv,  on  avi(n7j.     Lib.  V.  §  52, 

2  See  Hug's  Introd,  N.  Test.  pt.  I.  p.  31,  Andovcr  ed. 

3  §  49.  4  Matt.  24:  24.  5  Rev.  1:  1.  22:  IG. 

6  Thus,  for  instance,  he  attributed  to  Christ  what  the  evangelists  had  related, 
that,  at  his  baptism,  something  descended  from  the  air  like  a  bird,  and  rested  up- 
on him.     Origen,  L.  I.  §  41. 

"^  *0  Tou  S^sov  naug  naQayoqivu  wg  aga  6  Saravug  xat  alrog  oftolmg  q>tt- 
vfig,  inidii^nai  fiiyaXa  sgya  ttal  &avfia<TTa,  (T(psTSQt>^6^svog  rrjv  to-v  S^eov 
do^av,  oig  ol  xq^i^ul  nQoasxsiv  ^ovXtf&svrag  anoiQineo&ai  ixtivov,  alXa  fiovto 
nuTteveiv  kavrm. 

8  Part  I.  p.  33,  Andover  cd. 


§  1.]  EARLY  EXISTENCE  OP  THE  N.  TEST. 


Thus  also,  in  the  third  century,  Porphyry^  in  his  attack  on  the 
Christians,  not  only  assails  the  sacred  books  of  the  Jews,  especially 
the  book  of  Daniel,  of  which  he  used  the  Greek  translation  then  re- 
ceived among  the  Christians;  but  he  professedly  directs  his  princi- 
pal energies  against  the  peculiar  Scriptures  of  the  Christians.  And 
as  far  as  can  be  inferred  from  the  few  passages  incidentally  quoted 
from  him  by  Jerome,  he  was  acquainted  at  least  with  the  gospels  of 
Matthew,  Mark  and  John.  For  Jerome  mentions^  an  error  of 
which  Porphyry  accuses  the  evangelists  in  their  account  of  Jesus' 
walking  on  the  sea,  an  incident  recorded  in  Matt.  14:  25,  etc.  Mark 
6:  48,  etc.  and  John  6:  19.  He  also  states^  that  Porphyry  assails 
the  account  of  Matthew's  vocation,  which  is  found  only  in  the  gos- 
pel of  this  evangelist ;  that  he  objects  to  Mark  1:2;  and  takes  oc- 
casion from  John  7:  8,  10,  to  accuse  Jesus  of  instability  of  charac- 
ter."* Perhaps  he  was  also  acquainted  with  the  Acts  of  the  apos- 
tles,^ or  at  least  with  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians  ;  for  Jerome^  men- 
tions an  unfair  use  which  he  made  of  the  dispute  between  Paul  and 
Peter.  And  even  Chrysostom"''  appeals  to  Celsus  and  Porphyry 
for  the  antiquity  of  the  New  Testament  Scriptures.  He  remarks: 
iKccvol  Si  xat  xa&*  i^fiaiv  eigrjitoieg,  t»Ji/  d^x^iotriia  fictgrvgrjaat  ?wv 
^iSXiMv,  01  negl  Kilaov  ttal  zov  Baxaviiaxriv  xov  [lix  fxeipov.  Ou 
yag  Si]  To7g  fiez  avtovg  ovvte&eiGi>v  dvTtXiyov,  i.  e.  those  who  were 
our  enemies,  Celsus  and  after  him  Bataneotes,^  are  suitable  witness- 
es to  testify  the  antiquity  of  our  books  : — for  they  did  not  surely 
endeavour  to  refute  books  which  were  composed  after  the  time  in 
which  they  lived. 

To  the  testimony  of  Porphyry  and  Celsus  may  be  added  that  of 
Amelius,  who,  as  we  learn  from  Eusebius,  was  acquainted  with  the 
gospel  of  John.^ 

III.  4.   There  is  nothing  strange  in  the  preceding  heathen  testi- 
mony in  favour  of  the  Christian  Scriptures, 

Nor  is  it  by  any  means  surprising  that  pagan  writers  should  be 
acquainted  with  the  facts,  established  by  their  testimony  in  the  pre- 

1  [Porphyry  was  born  at  Tyre  A.  D.  233 ;  died  A.  D.  270.] 

2  Quaest.  in  Genes,  cap.  1.  v.  10.  3  Hieron.  in  Matt.  9:  9.  3: 3. 
4  Hieron.  contra  Pelag.  Lib.  II.  §  17.  5  Id.  Com.  in  Joel  2:  28,  etc. 

6  Comment,  in  Es.  53:  12.    Proem,  in  Ep.  ad  Gal. 

7  Homil.  VI.  in  Ep.  1  ad  Corinth. 

8  [Bataneotes  was  a  name  given  to  Porphyry  by  both  Jerome  and  Chrysostom; 
but  the  reason  of  this  appellation  seems  to  be  but  imperfectly  known.  Heumann 
supposed  it  to  be  a  fictitious  name  affixed  by  Porphyry  himself  to  his  work  against 
the  Christians  ;  and  Fabricius  thinks  it  derived  from  Batanea,  a  town  in  Syria, 
in  which  he  supposes  Porphyry  may  have  been  born.     S.] 

9  Praep.  Evang.  L.  XI.  c.  18,  19. 


24  GENUINENESS  OP  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

ceding  illustrations,  when  we  recollect  what  Tertulliani  gays  to  them 
in  his  defence  of  the  Christians  against  the  heathen,  c.  31 :  "  Read" 
says  he  "  the  words  of  God,  our  Scriptures,"  from  which  he  soon 
after  quotes  some  words  of  Christ,  and  c.  32,  of  Paul,  "  which  we 
ourselves  have  no  disposition  to  conceal  from  our  view,  and  which 
have,  in  various  ways,  fallen  into  the  hands  of  those  who  are  not 
Christians." 


SECTION  II. 


The  genuineness  of  the  homologoumena  or  universally  received 
hooks  of  the  New  Testament. 

If  we  listen  to  the  testimony  of  the  Christians  themselves,  we 
find  that  not  only  the  age  of  Eusehius  (the  commencement  of  the 
fourth  century),  and  the  earlier  age  in  which  Origen  lived  (the 
third  century)  (1),  but  also  the  tradition  of  still  more  ancient  times(2), 
that  is,  the  concurrent  opinion  of  all  those  writers  whose  produc- 
tions had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  these  Christian  Fathers(3),  unan- 
imously declare  the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  thir- 
teen epistles  of  Paul,  and  the  frst  epistle  of  John  and  first  of  Pe- 
ter, to  be  the  genuine  productions(4)  of  those  disciples  of  Jesus  to 
whom  they  are  ascribed.  Nor  have  we  any  reason  to  doubt  their 
genuineness.  For  in  the  few  fragments  of  those  earlier  writers 
which  have  reached  us,  we  find  that  they  did  actually  view  these 
books  in  that  light,  in  which  Origen  and  Eusebius  report  these 
earlier  writers  to  have  viewed  them (5).  Moreover  there  is  nothing 
found  in  these  writings  incongruous  either  with  the  age  in  which 
they  are  said  to  have  been  written,  or  the  authors  to  whom  they 
are  attributed (6).  And  even  those  (heretics)  to  whose  interest  the 
authority  of  these  sacred  writings  was  extremely  prejudicial,  did  not 
at  first  presume  to  dispute  their  genuineness ;  but  endeavoured  to 
extricate  themselves  from  their  difiiculties  by  arbitrary  interpreta- 
tions(7)  of  the  odious  paragraphs,  or  by  the  alteration,  or  erasure 

1  [TertuUian  was  born  at  Carthage  soon  after  A.  D.  150.  He  flourished  in  the 
time  of  Sevorus  and  Antoninus  Caracalla,  A.  D.  194—216.  He  is  generally  con- 
sidered the  most  ancient  Latin  Father  extant,  for  he  was  well  skilled  in  Roman 
law  and  in  the  Greek  and  Roman  poets.    S.] 


«J  2.]  HOMOLOGOUMENA.       EUSEBIUS  AND  ORIGEN.  S$ 

of  them  ;  thereby  pronouncing  these  writings  not  spurious  but  only 
adulterated(8)  ;  or  finally,  they  sought  refuge  by  denying  the  au- 
thority of  the  vvriters(9),  while  they  confessed  the  genuineness  of 
the  books.  And  when,  in  the  course  of  time,  they  began  to  dis- 
pute even  the  genuineness  of  the  writings,  they  did  not  urge  the 
want  of  ancient  testimony  in  their  favour,  or  attempt  to  impugn  their 
genuineness  with  any  historical  objections  ;  but  they  were  content- 
ed to  adduce  some  trifling  pretended  doctrinal  objections,  extorted 
from  the  writings  which  were  the  object  of  their  hatred^^^a 

Illustration  1.  «     ^' /is* 

The  testimony  of  the  ages  of  Eusebius  and  Origen^     ^'^ 

The  principal  passages  of  Eusebius  and  Origen,  containing  their 
testimony  on  this  subject,  and  which  will  frequently  be  referred  to 
in  the  sequel,  are  the  following. 

Eusebius  says  f — "It  seems  therefore  proper  here  to  give  a  cata- 

1  [Eusebius,  surnamed  Pamphilius  from  his  friend  the  martyr  of  that  name, 
was  born  at  Cesarea  in  PalestiYie  about  a.  d.  270,  or  perhaps  earlier.  He  flour- 
ished principally  during  the  reigns  of  Constantius  and  Constantine  ;  and  as  Je- 
rome states  "  was  a  man  most  studious  in  the  divine  Scriptures,  was  very  dil- 
igent in  making  a  large  collection  of  the  writings  of  Christian  authors,  and  pub- 
lished innumerable  volumes."  He  was  made  bishop  of  Caesarea  about  315, 
and  died  in  339  or  340. 

Origen,  the  son  of  Leonidas  the  martyr,  was  born  in  Egypt  x.  d.  184  or  185, 
and  early  made  great  proficiency  in  knowledge.  He  taught  at  Alexandria  and 
Caesarea.  His  writings  were  so  extremely  numerous  that  Jerome  says,  "  Ho 
wrote  more  than  any  other  man  could  read."  After  having  spent  a  life  of  aston- 
ishing activity  in  the  cause  of  Christianity,  and  suffered  much  in  the  Decian 
persecution  (a.  d.  250)  he  died  in  the  70th  year  of  his  age.     S.] 

2  EvXoyov  5'  svTav&a  /Evofiivovg,  ocvaxfcpaXanaaacr&ai  rag  di^lm&shag* 
rfj?  xatvrjg  dia&ijxrjg  ygaqxxg,  teal  drj  xaxTsov  iv  ngmoig,  t^v  ayiav  tav 
siayysUav  TfT^«xT»;f  olg  cVifiat  ?^  twv  ngd^eav  rav' Anotnolav  ygaq)'^' 
fiSTcc  di  TavTi]V,  rug  JIvtvXov  xaTaXexTeov  iTTiaiolag'  alg  k^rjg  ti]v  q)ego(j,iv7jv 
*I(aavvov  TtgoTsgaVj  xal  ofioicag  ti]V  IHtqov  xvgojTeov  iTticrjoXrjv .  'fiTrt  tov- 
TOig  T«XT€Ov,  ilys  <pavsir),  t*}v  anoxaXvifJiv^ latdwov' [nsgl  rig  joc  do^avra  xara 
xaigdv  ixS-r}(r6iJ>s&a).  Kal  Tavta  /^evjv  6  fi  o  X  o  y  ov  fiivo  ig.  T(av  d* 
av  T  tX  sy  o  fiiv  biv,  yvwgifiiav  8^  ovv  ofiojg  Tolg  noXXdig,  ?;  Xsyofiivij  ^laxta- 
^ov  (pigEtai  nut  7^  'lovda'  ijic  nhgov  dsviiga  inKnoXi),  xal  »;  ovofia^oftivij 
dtvxiga  xal  Tgiit]* loxxvpov  lirs  rov  EvayyiXiaiov  tvyxocvovaai,  EiTsxal  erigov 
o/tbivvfiov  ixtlvb).     'Ev  t  0%  g  v  6  &  o  i  g  xaTaTSTax&M  xal  tuv  JlavXov  nga^- 

*  Vogel,  who,  in  his  Program,  p.  3 — 8,  has  illustrated  this  passage  with  distin- 
guished perspicuity,  explains,  p.  4,  the  word  SyXajd'siaag  thus  : — libros  quos  in 
ivSia&TJxovi  referendos  esse,  manifeslum  est  et  extra  controversiam  positum,  i.  e. 
books  which  were  beyond  all  doubt  received  into  the  canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.    He  therefore  makes  it  refer  solely  to  the  homologoumena. 


4 


A 


5?6  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK,  1. 


logue  of  the  writings  of  the  New  Covenant  to  which  we  have  allu- 
ded. The  four  holy  evangelists  must  be  placed  first.  After  these 
must  follow  the  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  apostles ;  after  that  are  to 
be  placed  tlie  cjnstles  oj  Paul.  The  first  epistle  of  John  and  also 
that  of  Peter  are  then  to  succeed.  After  these,  if  it  is  thought 
proper,  may  be  placed  the  Apocalypse  of  John^  the  opinions  rela- 
tive to  which  we  will  mention  in  due  time.  And  these  belong  to 
the  homologoumena.  But  to  the  aniihgomena,  which  yet  are  well 
known  to  many,  belong  those  which  are  called  the  epistle  of  James 
and  of  Jude :  also  the  second  epistle  of  Peter ^  and"  those  which 
are  considered  the  second  and  third  of  John,  whether  written  by 
the  evangelist  or  some  other  person  of  the  same  name.  With  the 
spurious  are  also  lo  be  reckoned  the  Acts  of  Paul,  and  what  is  call- 
ed ihe  Shepherd,,  am)  the  revelation  of  Peter.  And  to  these  are  to 
be  added  the  reputed  epistfe  orBarnebas,and  the  so  called  Instruc- 
tions of  the  Apjostles  ;  and  if  thottght  proper,  the  Revelation  of  Si, 
John  may  be  added,  whichy  as  has  been  stated,  some  reject,  and 
others  class  among  the  homologoumena.  There  have  likewise  beea 
some  who  placed  among  these  the  Hebrew  gospel,  which  is  prized 
more  especially  by  the  Hebrews  who  have  embraced  Christianity. 
Now  all  these  may  be  classed  with  the  antilegomena.  Nor  is  it  indeed 
without  necessity,  that  we  have  made  a  catalogue  of  these  books  also, 
in  order  that  we  may  distinguish  those  writings,  which  according  to 
the  traditionary  opinion  of  the  church,  are  not  fictitious  but  genuine 
and  universally  acknowledged,  from  others  which,  although  they 
were  disputed,  were  known  to  the  greater  part  of  ecclesiastical  wri- 

ioyp  4  yQa^ijf  o  T€  Xeyoft^rog  iKHfxrtV^  ^etl  ^  ocTioxdkvfig  nhqovr  xtti  nqog 
rovioig,  gl)  cpegofiivt}  Bagvu^u  ijTicrroXT},  Ttal  xmv  AnodJoXoiv  at  Xsyo^svai,  did- 
axal'  STL  Ts  wg  scprfV,  i)  'Imuvvov  anoxaXvipig,  el  qtavtlrj,  t]v  riveg,  wj  scpriv^ 
a&sjovaiv,  tTSQoi  ds  iyaqlvovai  jolg  o^oXoyov^ivoLg.  ^'ll8ri  ^  iv  xovtoig  xt- 
vsg  jcal  to  ica&^'E3Quiovg  stayyeXiov  xaxsXt^av,  oj  (iixXKnu'E^QaloiV  oi  tor 
Xqiajov  naQudf^a^kvoi  x'^^QOvai.  Tavca  ^bv  navTa  rav  avTiXeyonsroov  Sv 
HI]'  avayxalwg  8b  not  tovtuv  '6[x(ag  xov  xaraXoyov  nBnon^fis&eCf  dLuxglvaviBg 
tag  T£  x«Ta  rijv  ixxXrjinaaTix^v  nugocSoaiv  aXs&slg  xal  anaXacnovg  xal  avoi- 
^oXoyrjfXBvotg  yqa(fug,  xal  t«$  aXXag  naqa  Taviag,  oix  ivdia&ijxovg  ^liv,  aXXa 
xal  avTiXByojxevug,  o^wg  ds  nnqa  nXslcnoig  jmv  ixxXrjaiaa-itxup  yiyvaaxofu- 
rag'  'iv  hldivai  s/otfisv  aviag  tb  ravTag,  xal  rug  ovofxaxi  tmv  AnoaToXar 
ngog  Jtav  alqsTixcav  nqocfBQO^ivag-  r^xoi  tog  Tlixgov  xal  Ooofta  xal  Max&£a, 
It]  xal  xivb3v  naqa  xovxovg  aXXov  BvayydXia  nEQif/ovaag'  i]  ^g'AvdqBov  xal 
'Imuvvov  xal  xmv  aXXwv  AKoaxoXoav  nqu^Big"  mv  oldsv  ovdufiwgiv  (TvyyQocfji- 
fittxi  xbjv  xuxa  dtadoxag  ixxXr^viacn ixoiv  xig  av7]q  slg  fiv/jfiTjv  avayuv  ij^laatv' 
noqqoi  de  tsov  xal  o  xfjg  cpQacsoyg  naqa  x6  i^&og  ta  unoaxoXixov  ivaXXdxitt 
XaQaxxr,Q'  ij  xe  yvafirj  xal  i)  xmv  iv  avxolg  (^SQOfiBVbyv  TcqoaiqBOig,  nXilaxoy 
otrov'XTiig  aXrj&ovg  og&odo^lag  dnadovaa,  oxi  di]  uIqexixwv  dvdqoiv  dvanXda" 
t^txttt  xvyxavn,  (ra<jpwff  Ttaqlai^vLV'  o&ev  ovd'  iv  vo&oig  avxd  xaxaiaxxiov, 
«U'  w?  uxoTxa  navxri  xal  dvaas^ij  nagatxrjxiov.     Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.  III.  25w 


^  2.]  HOMOLOCOUMENA.      EUSEBIUS,    ETC,  27 

ters.  And  agai«,  that  we  may  discriminate  between  these  and  such 
as  the  heretics  brought  forward,  under  pretence  of  their  being  pro- 
ductions of  the  Apostles;  such  as  the  gospels  of  Peter^  and  Thom- 
as and  Matthias^  and  some  others,  and  the  Acts  of  Andretv  and 
of  John  and  of  the  other  Apostles;  which  not  one  of  the  whole  list 
of  ecclesiastical  writers  has  ever  thought  worthy  of  being  quoted. 
The  character  of  their  diction  is  very  diverse  from  the  style  of  the 
Apostles  :  and  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  their  contents  deviate  so 
entirely  from  the  true  doctrines,  as  clearly  to  prove  them  to  be  the 
fabrications  of  heretics.  Hence  they  cannot  be  classed  even  with 
the  spurious  writings ;  but  must  be  denounced  as  absurd  and  impi- 
ous." 

The  principal  passage  of  Origen  may  be  seen  in, his  Commenta- 
ry on  Matthew  and  John,  preserved  by  Eusebius.^ 

It  is  true  that  in  these  passages,  neither  Eusebius  nor  Origen 
specifies  the  number  of  the  universally  received  writings  of  the  apostle 
Paul.  But  it  is  evident  from  other  passages  of  Eusebius,  that  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  the  only  one  which  was  not  received  into 
the  number  of  the  homologoumena.  He  says,^  "  The  fourteen  epis- 
tles of  Paul  are  well  known  (Tigodrjloc  acci  oaqfTg) ;  yet  it  ought  not 
to  be  concealed  that  some  have  excluded  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, alleging  that  the  church  at  Rome  deny  {uviiXtyiai^ui)  it  to 
be  Paul's :  and  in  another  passage  he  remarks,  that  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  nagia' PMfxalwv tiolp  ov  vofilCerai  lov'Anooio^ov  tvy- 
XocvHv,^  is  by  some  Romans  not  regarded  as  a  production  of  the 
apostle  (Paul).  And  he  elsewhere'^  classes  this  epistle  with  the 
antilegomena,  i.  e.  with  those  books  which  were  not  universally  re- 
ceived. In  like  manner  Origen^  excludes  none  but  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  from  the  universally  received  apostolical  writings  ;  and 
all  the  other  epistles  of  Paul,  he  attributes,  without  the  least 
hesitation,  to  that  apostle,  in  innumerable  instances;  excepting  that 
to  Philemon,  which  from  its  extreme  brevity  would  naturally  be  but 
seldom  quoted ;  and  yet  even  this  epistle  is  in  ono  passage  express- 
ly ascribed  to  Paul.^  Yet  Origen  was  much  disposed  to  express 
his  doubts  relative  to  the  antilegomena  ;  and  it  has  been  proved  that 
he  distinguished  them  from  the  homologoumena,  by  his  manner  of 
quoting  them.'  Thus  in  his  Commentary  on  John,^  he  quotes  the 
first  epistle  of  James  with  these  words,  wg  iv  rrj  cpegofiivri  rov  'laxo'j^ov 

1  Eccles.  Hist.  VI.  25.  2  Euseb.  Hisl.  Eccles.  III.  3. 

3  Euseb.  VI.  20.  4  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  13. 

•''  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  VI.  25.  6  Jn  the  10th  Homily  on  Jeremiah,  §  2. 

7  See  the  Apology  for  the  Revelation  §  G,  note  2  ;  and  the  work  "  On  the  Gos- 
pel and  Epistles  of  John,"  p.  106,  etc. 

8  Tom.  XIX.  §  6. 


28  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TE«T.  [bK.  ]» 

iiunxoXri  avfyvwfifv /\,  e.  as  we  read  in  the  reputed  epistle  of  James ; 
and  in  his  Commentary  on  Matt.*  when  citing  the  epistle  of  Jude, 
he  adds,  d  df  xal  tt/V  'Jovda  ngoaoiio  rig  IthgtoXtiv  i.  e.  if  we  ac- 
knowledge the  epistle  of  Jude.  Thus  also  in  his  letter  to  Africanus,^ 
although  he  there  undertakes  to  prove  Paul  to  be  the  author  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  still  when  pressed  with  the  objection  that  it 
was  not  genuine,  he  waves  the  quotation  which  he  had  made  from  it, 
and  passes  on  to  another  proof  from  Matthew.  But  still  stronger  are 
the  terms  in  which  he  expresses  himself  when  citing  the  Pastor  of 
Hermas,  which  he  regarded  as  a  divine  book  f  d  di  X9^  loX^riautt- 
ra  yal  ano  rivog  (fiQOiufvtjg  fAiv  tv  Jtj  ixxXrja/^  YQ^^V^i  ov  Txaga 
■nuGt  ds  dfioXoyov^tvag  sivad  {f^iiag^  k.  t.  A.  i.  e.  if  we  may  venture  to 
quote  from  a  book  that  is  commonly  used  by  the  ehwrch,  yet  not 
received  as  divine  by  the  unanimous  consent  of  all.  And  he  him- 
self informs  us,  that  he  cited  passages  from  such  books,  "  non  ad 
auctoritatem,  sed  ad  manifestationem  propositae  quaestionis,"  i.  e. 
not  for  the  proof,  but  illustration  of  the  point  under  discussion.* 
The  principal  passages  of  Origen,  in  which  he  quotes  the  Epistles, 
are  the  following  : — 

For  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  and  the  first  of  Corinthians,  see 

Grig,  contra  Celsum,  Lib.  III.  <§»  46 — 48. 
For  the  second  of  Corinthians  and  the  Epistle  to  the   Galatians, 

idem  Lib.  I.  <§.  48.  47.  II.  <^  L 
For  the  Epistles  to  the  Epbesians,  Colossians  and  Philippians,  Lib. 

VI.  <^  54.     Lib.  IV.  <§>  49.  18.     Preface,  <§.  5. 

For  the  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  Lib.  V.  «S  17.     Lib. 
VI.  §  44,  etc. 

For  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  Lib,  I.  'S  63.     Lib.  IV. 
^10.     Lib.  III.  ^48. 

In  like  manner  also  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Origen  expressly 
attributed  to  Luke  ;  (og  6  Aovxag  iv  julg  ngd'itaiv  tmv  ujiogtoXcdv 
*ypaqc*,^  i.  e.  as  Luke  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  has  declared. 
And  the  reason  why  he  did  not  mention  the  book  of  Acts  in  the 
jpassages  which  Eusebius  quotes  from  his  Commentary  on  Matthew 
and  John,  was  that  Origen  there  wished  to  speak  only  of  the  Goe** 
pels,  of  the  writings  of  the  apostles  Paul,  Peter,  and  John.  -ifl 

1  Tom. XVII.  §  30.  2  §  a.  3  Lib.  X.  in  Epi^^Romanos,  §~37. 

4  Vide  Mag.  furchristliche  Dogmatik  und  Moral,  Stuck  9.  S.  17— 2G. 

frnm^hl"  V'  T^"  Celsum    §  II.     Soe  also  the  pas.sage  which  Eusebius  quotes 
irom  h)s  Homilies  on  the  Hebrews,  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  VI.  25. 


^  2.]  HOMOLOGOUMENA,  EUSEBIUS  AND  ORIGEN.  W 

III.  2.  The  reference  of  Easehius  and  Origen  to  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal tradition  respecting  the  homohgoumena  ;  together  with  re- 
marks on  the  nature  of  this  tradition. 

The  passages  in  which  this  reference  is  contained,  are  those  quot- 
ed in  the  last  Illustration  ;  together  with  another  passage,^  in  which 
Eusebius  remarks,  that  the  Gospel  and  first  Epistle  of  John,  which 
were  classed  with  the  homologoumena  in  ch.  25,  were  without  the 
least  hesitation  received  as  genuine  by  the  ancient  and  the  present 
church. 

Relative  to  the  nature  of  this  tradition,  Eusebius,  in  his  princi- 
pal passage  above  quoted  at  length,  uses  the  following  language  : 
(xi  xuTci  T^v  ixxXijaiaaTixyv  naQadoaiv  aXrj&flg  xal  ccTiXaaTOt  xai 
avwfAoXoyrifAtvai,  yQacpul ;  i.  e.  the  books  which  according  to  the 
tradition  of  the  church  are  generally  received  as  true  and  una- 
dulterated ;  and  Origen  says  (Euseb.  Ec.  Hist.  VI.  25.)  oiff 
iv  nagadoaev  fAu&aiv;  i.  e.  as  I  have  learned  from  tradition. 
That  by  this  ixxkriOiaaiixTJ  nugadooig  is  not  meant  the  oral  declara- 
tions of  the  contemporaries  of  Eusebius,  is  proved  in  the  Apology 
for  the  Revelation,^  where  it  is  evinced  that  th  s  phrase  of  Eusebius 
signifies  the  testimony  of  writers,  and  especially  of  those  prior  to  his 
day.  This  opinion  is  more  fully  discussed  by  Dr.  Flatt  in  his  Mag- 
azine,^ and  vindicated  against  different  significations  which  have  of 
late  been  given  to  that  phrase  as  used  by  Eusebius.  Ecker- 
manh,  in  his  dissertation  "  On  the  probable  origin  of  the  gospels  and 
the  Acts  of  the  apostles,'"*  regards  the  word  tradition  in  general,  and 
also  in  the  passage  of  Origen  above  quoted,  as  the  then  prevalent 
tenet  or  opinion  of  the  church.  According  to  his  idea  therefore, 
Eusebius  and  Origen  acknowledged  the  genuineness  of  the  homolo- 
goumena for  this  reason,  that  it  was  a  settled  opinion  of  the  church 
that  the  gospel  of  Matthew  or  of  John  etc.  was  really  written  by 
the  person  whose  name  it  bears.  The  ground  therefore  of  their 
reception  of  them  was,  that  their  genuineness  was  a  traditionary 
dogma  of  the  church.  In  the  "  Essay  on  the  Canon  of  Eusebius," 
by  J.  E.  C.  Schmidt,^  that  writer  explains  the  nagadooig  ixxXtjata^ 
Giixri  as  signifying  the  Canon  which  was  settled  by  the  church  of 
Eusebius.  And  Miinscher  thinks  it  signifies  the  prevailing  opinion 
of  the  Christian  churches  relative  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  and  adds  that  the  private  opinion  of  Eusebius,  as  well  as  of 


1  Hist.  Euseb.  III.  24.  2  p.  26.  note  7. 

a  Achtes  Stuck  s.  75—86. 

4  Tlieologische  Beilraege  (Tlieolonical  Conlributions)  Band  5  Stock  2. 

5  Henke's  Mag.  fur  Rel.  Phil.  (Mag.  for  Religious  Philosophy)  B.  V.  St.  III. 


s.  451,  etc. 


90  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK. 


Other  learned  men,  may  possibly  have  been  at  variance  with  it.^ 
The  principal  proof  that  ixaQudoaig  iy.xXr,aiaaTi,xrj  signifies  writ- 
ten tradition,  or  the  testimony  of  those  authors  with  whose  works 
Eusebius  was  acquainted,  is  found  in  the  leading  passage  itself  rela- 
tive to  the  canon.^  Here  Eusebius  describes  the  first  class  of  sa- 
cred writings,  the  homologoumena,  in  the  words  before  cited  :  al 
yuia  zr}v  ixxlr]Giaaiix7]i^  nuQudoaiv  alrj&elg  anXaaTOi  xat  avofxoX- 
oyrj^uvat  ygaqo.1 1.  e.  books  which  according  to  the  tradition  of  the 
church  are  generally  received  as  true  and  unadulterated  ;  but  rela- 
tive to  the  latter  class,  that  of  heretical  writings,  he  uses  these  words  : 
c5«'  ovdiif  oudufioig  Iv  ZTFrPAMMATl  xiov  xaxa  diadoxag  /xxAiy- 
oiaOTixMv  Tig  atftjg  tig  ^ivri^riv  uyayav  ri'tmof,  i.  e.  whom  not  a  single 
one  of  the  whole  succession  of  ecclesiastical  writers,  has  thought 
worthy  of  being  quoted.  The  same  idea  is  elsewhere^  thus  expres- 
sed :  ^riia  dgxcci(ov  fiijzs  Toiv  nui^'  i]fiug  iig  ixxXtjoiaaTixog  ovyyga- 
ifevg  Ta7g  i^'  uvtuv  Gvi/ixg^joaio  fiugivglccigj  i.  e.  no  ecclesiastical 
writer,  either  in  ancient  or  modern  times,  has  ever  made  any  use 
of  their  testimony.  The  descriptions  of  these  two  classes  of  books, 
are  evidently  correlative  ;  and  as  the  latter  class  is  distinguished  by 
the  total  want  of  testimony  of  writers  in  their  favour,  so  by  virtue 
of  their  antithetic  relation,  the  former  must  have  in  their  favour  the 
testimony  of  all  the  writers  whose  works  were  extant,  that  is  the 
nagadoaiv  ixxXriaittOTLxriv,  Vogel^  gives  this  sense  of  nagadootg 
ixxXfjaiaazixii ;  "  Judicium  ecclesiae  antiquitus  traditum"  i.  e.  the 
judgment  of  the  church  transmitted  from  former  ages  ;  and  subjoins 
this  remark:  certum  est,  nugadoaiv  ixy.h]acaGzixr!v  vel  confirmari, 
vel  nullam  esse  demonstrari,  ex  scriptorum  testimoniis  vel  silentio,  i.  e. 
it  is  clear  that  the  nugadooig  ixxXtjataarcxi]  may  either  be  confirmed 
or  be  proved  a  nullity,  by  the  testimony  or  silence  of  writers.  Accord- 
ing to  this  explanation  nagadoaig  ixxh^aiaaziitrj  would  signify  '*  the 
judgment  of  the  church,  relative  to  the  origin  and  authority  of  the 
sacred  writings,  derived  from  historical  transmission  :"  and  this  his- 
torical transmission  is  identical  with  the  testimony  of  writers,  es- 
pecially the  more  ancient  ones. — This  explanation,  it  is  self-evident, 
detracts  nothing  from  the  weight  of  the  nagudoavg  ixxXrjaiaazixi]. 

[Tiie  true  signification  of  the  phrase  nagadoaig  iytxltjaiaazixii 
may,  perhaps  not  unaptly,  be  illustrated  by  a  passage  of  the  Apos- 
tle Paul,  in  which  the  word  nagadoaig  is  used  and  its  import  deter- 
mined by  the  context :  "  therefore,  brethren,  be  steadfast,  and  hold 
the  traditions  {idg  nagadoaeig)  which  ye  have  been  taught,  wheth- 
er orally  or  by  our  epistle."      Tradition,  therefore,  would  signify 

1  Handbuch  der  christliciien  Dogmengeschichte  (Manual  of  the  History  ot 
the  cristians  doctrines)  Marpurg  1797.  vol.  I.  p.  246. 

2  See  that  passage  quoted  in  Illust.  I.  supra.  3  HI.  3. 
<  Comnientationes  de  Canone  Piusebiano,  Pt.  I.  p.  7.  n.  9.  Erlangen,  1809. 


<^  2.]  HOMOLOGOUMENA.       EUSEBIUS,  ETC.  31 

any  historical  account  or  opinion  transmitted  to  us  from  former  ages, 
whether  orally  or  by  writing  ;  and  ixxXtjoiaavixt]  would  point  us  to 
persons  connected  with  tlie  church,  as  the  channel  through  which  it 
was  conveyed.     S.] 

III.  3.   The  testimony  of  nil   the  writers  known  to  Origen  and 
Eusebius  was  in  favour  of  the  homologoumena. 

The  following  passages  from  Eusebius  may  be  adduced,  as  proof 
that  the  homologoumena  were  supported  by  the  unanimous  testi- 
mony of  all  whose  opinion  that  very  learned  man  had  read.  Rela- 
tive to  the  first  epistle  of  John,  he  remarks  :^  nccQa  n  roTg  vvv  xat 
To7g  it  dg^aiotg  avafiqiXaiCTog  (a^ioX6yt}Tui,  i.  e.  it  was  acknowledged 
as  genuine,  without  contradiction,  in  earlier  as  well  as  later  times. 
And  in  the  same  place,  he  terms  the  books  of  John,^(which  he 
afterwards  classed  with  the  homologoumena,^)  tovdt:  tou  anoatokov 
ccvuvTtQgtJTOc  ypaqai  i.e.  the  productions  of  this  apostle,  which  had 
never  been  disputed. 

In  the  work  entitled  "  The  design  of  the  gospel  and  epistles  of 
John"^  the  fact  is  established,  in  refutation  of  Merkel,'*  that  Origen 
and  Eusebius  never  termed  any  books  ofAoXoyovfiivcc,  excepting  such 
as  were  unanimously,  and  without  any  exception,  acknowledged  as 
genuine.  Accordingly  they  could  not  have  given  this  appellation 
to  books,  which  were  merely  supported  by  some  testimony,  with 
which  other  testimony  might  be  at  variance.  Origen  remarks  of 
the  four  Evangelists,  that  avccviigQ^Tu  iailv  Iv  trj  vnc  xov  ovgavov 
ixxXrjoia  d^fov  i.  e.  they  are  every  where  received  without  contra- 
diction by  the  whole  church  of  God.  The  same  universal  coinci- 
dence of  testimony  is  signified  by  the  term  xa&oltxog  (universal), 
which  Origen  and  his  disciple  Dionysius  apply  to  the  first  epistle 
of  John. ^  And  the  idea  that  the  second  and  third  epistle  of  John 
are  not  ofAoXoyovfieva  but  ccwcXeyofieva.^  is  expressed  by  Origen  thus  : 
ov  nuvng  yarjalovg  qaal  xaviag,  i.  e.  they  are  not  pronounced 
genuine  by  all.  Now  if  these  words  contain  a  definition  of  avr*- 
Ifyofievovy  it  follows  by  virtue  of  the  antithesis,  that  OfioXoyovfievov 
must  signify  a  book  o  navieg  qaolyvTiatov^  i.  e.  which  all  acknowledge 
to  be  genuine. 

III.  4.  Proof  that  the  testimony  of  Origen  and  Eusebius  rela- 
tive to  the  books  termed  homologoumena,  refers  specifically  to 
their  genuineness. 

It  is  evident  that  the  passages,   which  Eusebius"''  quotes  from 
Origen,  refer  to  the  genuineness  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 

1  III.  24.  2  111.25.  3  p.  113,  &c.  ~^~ 

4  See  Merkel's  "  Proof  that  the  Apocalypse  is  a  spurious  book." 

5  Euseb.  VII.  25.  6  Euseb.  VI.  25.  7  VI,  25. 


32  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [jlK,  !• 


ment,  that  is,  to  the  question  whether  they  are  really  the  produc- 
tions of  the  persons  to  whom  they  are  ascribed.  For  in  the  passage 
just  referred  to,  Origen  speaks  not  only  of  the  four  Gospels,  but  of 
the  authors  of  them,  whom  he  individually  names.  He  mentions 
for  whose  use,  and  for  what  purpose  each  apostle  wrote,  and  ex- 
presses himself  thus  :  Utrgog  iduv  iniaxoliiv  OfAoloyov^ivriv  xara- 
Xe'Xocm — ' Jam w rig  ^vuyyihov  ev  xaTaXi'Xomev—iygaipe  Si  ymI  ti]v 
anoxukvipti' — xuTuXikoim  di  xul  iniGToXrivn(xvv  oXiywv  aztxcov  eatot 
Si  xai  dtvitgav  yiat  tqittiv'  ind  ou  ndvTig  (faal  rNH^IOTZ  eha^ 
Tuviag,  i.  e.  Peter  has  left  us  one  epistle  which  is  universally  at- 
tributed to  him — John  has  left  us  one  Gospel — he  also  wrote  the 
Apocalypse — he  also  left  us  an  epistle  of  very  few  hnes ;  and  per- 
haps also,  a  second  and  a  third  for  not  all  agree  in  pronouncing  the 
two  last  genuine. 

Relative  to  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  himself,^  it  is  certain  that 
by  terming  these  books  (mentioned  above  in  'J'*  2.)  o^oXoyovfieva^ 
he  meant  that  they  were  unanimously  received  as  genuine.  For 
he  distinguishes  between  these  homologoumena,  or  books  univer- 
sally received  as  genuine,  and  the  vox^a  or  avTiXeyo^evcc,  which 
were  books  whose  genuineness  was  not  universally  admitted,  but 
was  disputed  by  some. 

That  Eusebius  did  not  intend,  by  the  term  v6{^a,  to  designate 
such  writings  as  were  universally  regarded  as  spurious ;  but  meant 
books  whose  genuineness  was  denied  by  some  and  acknowledged 
by  others,  is  evident  from  the  following  considerations.  In  the 
first  place,  Eusebius,  in  his  main  passage,  most  explicitly  distin- 
guishes between  the  vo^a  and  a  third  class  of  writings,  which  were 
fabricated  by  heretics,  dtQiicafZv  avdgojv  avanXaaiAOLTu,  and  which 
deviated  entirely  from  the  true  doctrines,  ir]g  aXri&ovg  og^oSo^iag 
anadovTcx,  (or  are,  as  he  elsewhere^  expresses,  himself,  remote  from 
the  true  apostolical  doctrines,  i^jg  dnoaioXtx^g  og^odo^iag  dXXorgta' 
and  which  he  designates  by  the  appellation  navii'Xmg  v6%fa  i.  e. 
altogether  spurious.  He  expressly  states,  ovda  Iv  vo&otg  avid  xaz- 
axuKitov,  that  they  cannot  be  reckoned  to  the  class  of  vod^cop  for 
they  were  treated  with  such  contempt  by  all  the  writers  of  the 
church,  that  there  was  not  even  any  dispute  about  their  spurious- 
ness.  Secondly  :  Eusebius  uses  the  terms  vo&ov  and  avTtXiyofievov 
as  synonymous.  Thus  in  one  place,^  he  classes  the  epistle  of  James 
with  the  dvTiXsyofieva'  and  in  another,*  he  remarks  of  the  same  epis- 
tle iGTtov  (og  vo^eveTttL,  which  words  must  be  rendered.  It  should  be 
remembered,  that  it  is  regarded  as  not  genuine  by  some.  For 
immediately  preceding  this  we  read,  "  thus  much  of  James,  from 
whom  the  first  of  the  reputed  catholic  epistles  is  said  to  be  derived, 

1  See  his  main  passage,  Illustration  1,  of  this  §. 

2  111,31.  3  111,25.  4  11,23. 


^  ^.]  HOMOLOGOUMENA.       EUSEBIUS,  ETC.  33 

TOtavioc  Kat  rd  xaia  tov  '/axm^oVy  ov  tj  ngoJTrj  xmv  ovofta^ofuvatp 
AaV^okixMv  emaioXiMv  thai  Xsyeiai.  This  kfyerat,  necessarily  refers 
to  those  who  ascribed  this  epistle  to  James.  In  like  manner  the 
Actus  Pauli,  the  Pastor  of  Hernias  and  the  epistle  of  Barnabas,  all 
of  which  are  classed  with  the  vox^a  in  III,  25  are  in  other  places, 
quoted  as  writings  which  are  not  ofioXoyov^iva^  but  disputed  by 
some  [dnQog  xipcov  avTvXtXixtavy^  and  he  terms  XhemavxtXeyofAtvot,^ 
as  for  example  the  epistle  of  Barnabas.^  In  addition  to  these  evi- 
dences of  the  use  of  dvTvltyo^ivov  and  vo&ov  as  synonymes  by 
Eusebius,  two  others  of  a  decisive  character,  derived  from  the 
principal  passage  so  often  quoted,  are  adduced  in  the  "  New  Apolo- 
gy for  the  Revelation  of  St.  John.''^  The  first  is  founded  on  the 
words  6v  To7g  vo&otg  naxaTixdx&oi  KAJ<,  i.  e.  among  the  books  which 
are  not  received  as  genuine  must  also  be  numbered.  Now  what 
can  this  KAJ^  also,  signify,  if  the  books  which  he  had  described 
as  vod^a  did  not  belong  to  the  same  class  with  those  which  he  had 
immediately  before  mentioned  as  dvxileyo^uva  ?  The  second  proof 
is  in  the  concluding  words  of  the  enumeration  of  the  voOtov;  "  now 
all  these  may  be  classed  with  the  antilegomena  or  disputed  books :" 
xavxa  fih  navxa  xaiv  dvxiXsyofiepoDv  dv  fh].  These  concluding  words 
correspond  with  the  phrase  xal  xavxa  ^h  iv  o^oloyov^tvoig  (and 
these  all  belong  to  the  homologoumena),  which  terminates  a  pre- 
ceding enumeration  of  the  dfAoXoyovfieva  in  the  earlier  part  of  the 
passage ;  and  they  indicate  that  all  the  books  which  had  been  enu- 
merated between  these  two  phrases,  belong  to  the  same  class  of 
avxiliyofAtviov  or  vod^tav.  It  is  evident  therefore  that,  in  the  phrase- 
ology of  Eusebius,  these  are  synonymous  words.  And  this  transla- 
tion of  the  word  voOoq  as  signifying  "  considered  not  genuine,"  is 
authorized  by  a  very  customary  mode  of  expression,  according  to 
which  "  to  be  genuine"  is  synonymous  with  "  to  be  considered 
genuine. ""^  It  is  indeed  an  opinion  entertained  by  many  learned 
men,  that  Eusebius  in  this  noted  passage  makes  a  fourfold  division, 
into  (1)  OfAoXoyovfAfvu,  (2)  upitXfyofieva,  (3)  voOa^  and  (4)  axonu 
yal  duGOf^fj  {nuvxiXtog  vo&a),  absurd  and  impious  (altogether  spuri- 
ous). But  the  arguments  in  opposition  to  this  opinion,  and  in  favour 
of  a  triple  division,  are  fully  stated  and  vindicated  in  the  "  Disserta- 
tion on  the  Canon  of  Eusebius,"  in  Flatt's  Magazine  f  and  by  the 
author  of  the  Comment.  (Sup.  cit.  P.  II.  p.  3 — 10.)  who  adopts 
the  triple  division,  and  remarks,  "  that  Eusebius  may  have  used  the 
milder  term  dvxiXfyo^ifva  in  reference  to  the  Canon  of  his  own 
church  at  Caesarea,  in  which  the  five  catholic  epistles  are  contained ; 


Mil,  3.  2  VI.  13.      3Note  16.  §  4.  p.2.S,29. 

4  See  Observationes  ad  Analogiam  et  Syntaxin  Hebraicam  pertinentes,  p.  14. 
n.2,  Tdbingen,l776. 

5  Flatt's  Mag.  vol .  7.  p.  228—237. 

5 


^4  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK* 


and  then,  by  the  subsequent  phrase  Iv  toiQ  vod^oigxaTaifTux^M  xai 
may  have  'intended  to  intimate  that  in  his  judgment  the  severer 
term  voOa  might  have  been  applied  to  those  five  catholic  epistles, 
just  as  well  as  to  the  Acts  of  Paul,  the  Pastor  of  Hermas  he.  which 
were  enumerated  after  them."  Nor  is  the  explanation  of  o^oXo- 
vovfACva  and  vod^a  in  the  preceding  pages,  as  signifying  a  genuine- 
ness that  was  acknowledged  by  all,  and  a  genuineness  that  was  dis- 
puted by  some,  inconsistent  with  the  fact  that  Eusebius  classes 
among  the  voda  or  cti^idfyo^ivu.  (the  books  of  disputed  genuine- 
ness), the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  ;  for  this  work  was  regarded  as  a 
genuine  apostolical  production  by  the  Ebionites,  or  as  Eusebius 
terms  them,  To7g  iSgalocg  toV  X()tnidv  nagudi^afu'votg,  the  Hebrews 
who  believed  in  Christ.  And  though  it  is  certain  that  by  some  it 
was  believed  to  be  spurious  ;  yet  there  might  be  others  who  regard- 
ed it  as  belonging  to  the  homologoumena,  so  far  as  the  ground-work 
of  it  was  the  authentic  and  universally  received  text  of  the  gospel  of 
Matthew.  In  regard  to  the  works  of  Eusebius,  r]de  d'  iv  tovxotg 
Tiveg  xal  lo  xai>'  s^galovg  tuayyiXiov  'AUTtlilaVy  although  Michaelis 
considers  it  as  uncertain  whether  lomoig  refers  to  ofioXoyov^tvoig  or 
to  vodoig}  I  have  no  hesitation  in  considering  it  as  referring  to 
the  former.  For  voO^oig  is  much  more  remote  from  Tovrocg  than 
oiioloyovfjiivoig  which  just  precedes  it ;  and  Eusebius  was  interested 
in  detracting  from  the  weight  of  the  opinion  of  those  who  classed 
the  Apocalypse  with  the  homologoumena,  which  he  accomplished 
by  remarking,  that  the  case  of  the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews  was 
similar  to  that  of  the  Ayocalypse.  But  the  fact  that  Eusebius  him- 
self (as  Masch  contends)  did  not  class  the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews 
with  the  homologoumena,  but  referred  it  to  the  antilegomena,  is 
evident,  partly  from  the  circumstance  of  his  not  mentioning  it  earlier, 
whilst  enumerating  the  homologoumena ;  and  still  more  clearly  from 
his  own  words,  for  he  says  that  only  some,  {iivtg)  have  assigned  to 
this  gospel  a  place  among  the  universally  received  books  of  the 
New  Testament.  And  it  is  by  no  means  a  difficult  matter  to  per- 
ceive how  these  some  were  led  to  assign  it  this  place,  if  we  compare 
the  following  passages  of  Jerome  concerning  this  gospel.  In  the 
"  Catalogus  virorum  illustrium,"  s.  v.  Matthaeus,  he  says  :  Matthew 
— composed  the  gospel  of  Christ  in  the  Hebrew  language,  and  wrote 
it  with  Hebrew  letters  r  but  who  the  person  was  that  subsequently 
translated  it  into  Greek,  is  not  satisfactorily  known.  There  is,  more- 
over, at  present  in  the  Csesarean  library,  for  which  we  are  indebted 
to  the  distinguished  zeal  and  industry  of  the  martyr  Pamphilus,  a 
copy  of  the  Hebrew  itself.  And  it  was  by  the  Nazarenes  of  Beroea, 
a  city  of  Syria,  who  use  this  book,  that  I  was  enabled  to  make  a 

•  Michaelis'  Introduction  lo  New  Test.  III.  ed.  p.  893.  IV.  ed.  1033  &c. 


"§  2.]  HOMOLOGOUMENA.     EUSEBIUS,  ETC.  35 

transcript  of  it/'*  Now,  agreeably  to  the  context,  this  "  ipsuni 
Hebraicum"  can  refer  to  nothing  else  than  the  gospel  of  Matthew. 
Again  in  his  Dialog,  contra  Pelagianos  we  read :  ''In  the  Hebrew 
gospel  according  to  the  apostles,  or  as  is  generally  supposed,  ac- 
cording to  Matthew,  which  is  indeed  written  in  the  Syro-Chaldaic 
language,  but  with  Hebrew  letters,  which  the  Nazarenes  use  even 
at  the  present  day,  and  which  is  found  in  the  library  at  Csesarea,"^ 
&c.  Again  ;  "  In  the  gospel  which  the  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites 
use,  which  I  lately  translated  from  Hebrew  into  Greek,  and  which 
is  by  most  persons  called  the  authentic  gospel  of  Matthew,"  ^c.*^ 
Now  as  Jerome  professes  that  the  gospel  of  the  Nazarenes  is  the 
Hebrew  gospel  of  Matthew,  ipsum  Hebraicum,  authenticum  Matthaii, 
juxta  Matthaeum,  and  yet  himself  quotes  passages  from  the  Naza- 
rene  gospel  which  are  not  found  in  our  Matthew ;  we  are  led  to 
suppose  that  the  original  text  of  Matthew  was  the  ground  work 
of  the  Nazarene  Gospel,  but  that  additions  had  been  made  to  it. 
And  as  far  as  the  text  of  Matthew  was  the  ground  work  of 
the  gospel  of  the  Nazarenes  or  Hebrews,  it  might  have  been  ranked 
by  some  among  the  homologoumena.  Schmidt  does  indeed  sup- 
pose that  Jerome  at  first  believed  the  Hebrew  gospel  which  he 
transcribed  and  translated,  to  be  the  Hebrew  gospel  of  Matthew  ; 
and  that  he  subsequently  changed  his  opinion.  But  if  Jerome,  ac- 
cording to  the  first  of  the  passages  above  quoted,  in  which  he  calls 
the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews  "  ipsum  Hebraicum  Matthaei,"  did 
transcribe  it  and  had  already  translated  it  into  Greek  and  Latin,  as 
we  learn  from  the  preceding  passage  in  the  context ;  it  follows  that 
he  must  at  that  time  have  been  intimately  acquainted  with  it. 

We  would  yet  remark,  that  it  was  not  the  intention  of  Eusebius, 
in  his  main  passage  quoted  in  111.  1,  to  give  a  general  catalogue  of 
all  the  homologoumena,  that  is,  of  all  the  writings  of  Christians 
which  were  acknowledged  to  be  genuine  ;  (among  which,  for  exam- 
ple, the  first  epistle  of  Clemens  must  be  classed  ;  for  this  he  else- 
where also  calls  oftoloyovfitvr]  IntGToh]^  and  avo)^oloyov^tvri  naga 
naaiv  eniaioh],  and  Ofxoloyov^tvrj  yguqt]')  but  his  object  was  to 
enumerate  only  those  homologoumena,  which  belonged  to  the  col- 

1  "  Matthaeus — Evangclium  Christi  Hebr.iicis  Uteris  verbisque  composuit : 
quod  quis  postea  in  Graecum  transtulerit,  non  satis  certum  est.  Porro  ipsuni 
Hebraicum  habetur  usque  hodie  in  Caesariensi  bibliotheca,  quam  Pampliilus 
Martyr  studiosissime  coufecit.  Mihi  quoque  a  Nazaraeis,  qui  in  Beroea  urbe 
Syriae  hoc  volumine  utuntur,  describendi  facultas  fuit." 

2  "  In  Evang:elio  juxta  Hebraeos  quod  Chaldaico  quidem  Syroque  serinone, 
sed  Hebraicis  literis  scriptum  est,  quo  utuntur  usque  hodie  Nazareni,  secunduin 
Apostolos,  sivc  ut  plerique  autumant  juxta  Matthaeum,  quod  et  in  Ceesariensi 
habetur  bibliotheca,"  etc.  Dial.  cont.  Pelag.  Lib.  III.  2. 

3  In  Evangelio  quo  utuntur  Nazareni  et  Ebionitae,  quod  nuper  in  Greecum  de 
Hebraico  sermono  transtulimus,  et  quod  vocatur  a  plerisque  Matthaei  authenti- 
cum, etc.     Comment,  in  Matt.  XII.  13.  4  Euseb.  Ill,  16. 


36  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

lection  of  the  hooks  of  the  New  Testament ^  Sn^m^ihai,  THZ  KAI- 
NUS  AlASHKHZ  ygatpaL  But  the  question  in  this  place  is  not 
what  opinion  had  the  ancient  Christians  of  the  divine  authority  of 
certain  books,  and  according  to  what  principles  did  they  decide  on 
their  admission  into  the  canon,  that  is,  into  the  number  of  divine 
books  ;  but  our  sole  object  at  present  is  to  establish  by  their  testi- 
mony the  position  that  these  are  genuine  books.  And  most  assur- 
edly their  testimony  does  establish,  firmly  and  indisputably,  the  fact 
that  the  homologoumena  of  the  New  Testament  are  homologoumena 
indeed ;  that  is,  that  they  are  writings  which  are,  beyond  all  doubt, 
the  productions  of  those  persons  to  whom  they  are  ascribed  ;  and 
that  the  reason  why  they  were  adopted  into  the  number  of  the  re- 
ligious books  of  the  church,  and  received  as  authentic  records  of  the 
history  and  doctrines  of  Christianity,,  was  no  other  than  this,  that 
they  were  universally  believed  to  be  the  genuine  productions  of 
those  disciples  of  Jesus  whose  names  they  bear. 

III.  5.  Fragments  of  earlier  writers ;  and  proof  that  they  ac- 
tually  regarded  the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  thir- 
teen epistles  of  Paul,  and  the  first  epistle  of  John,  and  first  of 
Peter,  as  the  genuine  productions  of  those  disciples  of  Jesus  to 
whom  they  are  ascribed. 

Of  these  relics,  some  are  entire  books,  which  were  written  before 
the  time  of  Origen  ;  others  are  single  passages  of  more  ancient  wri- 
ters, which  are  found  as  quotations  in  later  authors,,  especially  io 
Eusebius.  Ek>sebius  himself  informs  us,^  that  in  the  perusal  of  ear- 
lier writings,  he  was  attentive  to  the  information  contained  in  them 
relative  to  each  individual  book  of  the  holy  Scriptures ;  but  that  he 
noted,  with  particular  c-are,  the  passages  quoted  from  those  books  of 
the  Christians  which  belong  to  the  antilegomena.  Some  of  the  few 
written  documents  of  the  eariier  christian  age,  which  have  been  pre- 
served entire,  are  of  a  polemical  nature,  being  directed  against  the 
Pagans  or  Jews,  who  were  but  partially  acquainted  with  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament ;  and  others  are  so  small  as  to  contain  but  a 
few  pages.  It  would  therefore  be  unreasonable  to  expect  that  we 
should  be  able  to  adduce  many  passages,  from  very  ancient  writings, 
for  the  authenticity  of  the  homologoumena  ;  especially,  as  we  shall 
appeal  only  to  those  ancient  writings  of  whose  integrity  we  have  no 
doubt;  and  even  from  these,  shall  adduce  only  such  passages  as 
quote  the  homologoumena,  not  in  an  indefinite  manner,  but  with  the 
express  mention  of  the  author's  name.  For  such  quotations  as  con- 
tain passages  of  a  book  of  the  New  Testament,  without  specifying 
the  name  of  the  a.uthor,  may  indeed  evince  the  antiquity  of  the  book, 

1  Ecc.  Hist.  in7a.  ~  '" 


^  2.]  HOMOLOGOUMENA.  EUSEBIUS,  ETC.  37 

but  can  never  be  advanced  in  support  of  its  genuineness.  These 
passages  are  collected  by  Professor  Less,  in  his  work  entitled 
"  Ueber  die  Religion,  ilire  Wahl  and  Bestatigung.^  Among  the 
ancient  witnesses  for  the  homologoumena,  who  quote  them  specify- 
ing the  author's  name,  are  the  nine  following. 

1.  Polycarp,  the  bishop  of  Smyrna  and  disciple  of  St.  John.  He 
ascribes  the  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  and  the  first  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  to  Paul.  For  in  his  letter  to  the  Philippians,  he  ex- 
pressly states,  that  Paul  wrote  to  them.  In  <§>  11.  he  quotes  1  Cor. 
6:  2,  adding  :  sicut  Paulus  docet,  i.  e.  as  we  learn  from  Paul.  He 
elswhere  makes  quotations  also  from  the  epistle  to  the  Ephesians 
and  the  first  epistle  to  Timothy,  and  the  first  of  Peter,  and  of  John, 
but  without  specifying  the  author's  name. 

2.  Papias,^  bishop  of  Hierapolis,  quoted  by  Eusebius,^  testifies, 
that  Mark,  the  disciple  of  Peter,  and  Matthew  recorded  the  actions  and 
declarations  of  our  Lord.  He  says  :^  "  Mark,  who  was  the  interpreter 
of  Peter,  made  an  accurate  record  of  whatsoever  he  recollected  ; 
though  not  in  the  order  in  which  the  things  were  said  and  done  by 
Christ.  He  was  particularly  careful,  neither  to  omit  any  thing  which 
he  had  heard,  nor  to  insert  any  thing  which  was  false.  Matthew  wrote 
his  gospel  ^  in  the  Hebrew  language,  and  each  one  interpreted  it  as 
well  as  he  could."  Eusebius  informs  us,  in  the  part  of  his  work 
above  referred  to,  that  Papias  also  made  quotations  from  the  first 
epistle  of  Peter  and  first  of  John.  But  it  may  be  questioned  wheth- 
er he  ascribes  them  to  those  apostles  by  a  specific  mention  of  their 
names.  For  Eusebius  asserts,  in  like  manner,  that  Polycarp  quoted 
some   passages  from  the  first  epistle  of  Peter ;  and  yet  we  learn 


'  Parti,  page  503,  &c.  On  the  citations  of  the  N.  Test,  contained  in  the 
most  ancient  ecclesiastical  writers,  vide  Hug's  Introduction  to  the  N.  Test, 
part  I.  §  7.  p.  29—31,  Andover  ed. 

2  [Papias  flourished,  according  to  Cave,  A.  D.  110  ;  or  as  others  contend,  about 
115.  He  is  said  by  Iraeneus,  to  have  been  a  companion  of  Polycarp  and  one  of 
St.  John's  hearers.     S.] 

3  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.  HI.  39,  the  end. 

*  MoiQxog  hQ^fjvsvcrig  JIstqov  yev6(j.EVog,  oaa  sfivrjfiovBvasv,  axQi^mg  ty- 
qa^iv  ov  fiinov  t«$£»  xa  VTii  lov  XgiiTTOV  i]  Xsx&svra  »j  ngax^svia' — kvog 
inoii\aaTO  ngovoiav,  rov  ^r^bh  oiv  rjxovffs  naqaXmuv,  tt]  ipsvaaa&di  rt  tv 
avTotg' — Mitt&alog  k^Qa'l'dt  diaXsmco  xa  Xoyia  (jvvtyqa\\>aTo'  'tjQixrivsvcre  d 
avra,  aig  rjdvvaio,  sxaazog. 

5  That  Ao/ta  here  signifies  gospel  or  written  narrative  of  the  history  and  doc- 
trines of  Jesus  is  evident  p;»rtly  from  the  customary  use  of  the  word,  and  partly, 
f^om  the  correspondence  of  the  loyiojv  of  Matthew  with  the  written  record  of  the 
notions  and  declarations  of  Jesus,  made  by  Mark,  f'y(>at//£  T«  vnu  rov  Xqigtou  7/ 
Xex^ivTut}  7CQax{yivxa.  In  the  work  (of  Dr.  Storr)  "  On  the  object  of  St.  John's 
Gospel,  tiie  author  proves  that  loyia  or  loyot  (c-iii'i)  is  synonymous  with  res, 
p.  !iJ50. 


38  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.   I. 

from  the  epistle  of  Polycarp  itself,  that  the  name  of  the  author  is 
not  annexed  to  the  passages  cited.  ^ 

3.  Justin  Martyr,^  From  the  writings  of  Justin,  it  may  be  in- 
ferred that  the  gospel  of  Mark  belongs  to  the  apostle  Peter,  whose 
disciple  Mark  was;  but  that  the  gospel  of  Luke  was  derived  from 
a  disciple  of  some  apostle,  who,  according  to  collateral  evedince, 
could  have  been  no  other  than  the  apostle  Paul.  Moreover  the 
ccnofivrjfioi'Svf.iccTa  t(ov  anooToXixw  or  Memorabilia  of  the  apostles, 
(the  gospel  to  which  the  aged  Justin  had  been  accustomed  in  his 
own  country,  Samaria,)  presupposd  not  only  the  high  antiquity  of 
the  gospel  of  Luke,  but  also  the  early  existence  of  our  gospel  of 
Matthew ;  just  as  the  apocryphal  gospels,  in  general,  of  which  Jus- 
tin's is  one,  are  not  an  evidence  against  the  antiquity  of  our  gospels, 
but  very  clearly  establish  their  age ;  because  it  is  evident  from  all 
the  apocryphal  gospels  which  have  descended  to  us,  that  their  au- 
thors were  acquainted  with  our  gospels.^  Nor  will  the  fact,  that 
Justin  quotes  almost  exclusively  such  books  as  were  known  in  his 
native  country,  (although,  in  the  course  of  his  travels,  he  doubtless 
became  acquainted  with  other  apostolic  epistles,)  appear  any  longer 
strange,  when  we  recollect  that  none  of  his  works  have  reached  us, 
excepting  such  as  were  addressed  to  the  enemies  of  his  religion. 
For  other  apologists  of  Christianity,  especially  Tertulhan,  rarely 
quote  the  N.  Test,  in  their  apologies  and  polemical  writings,  (ex- 
cept the  historical  books  to  which  they  were  compelled  to  appeal  in 
support  of  facts,)  yet  Tertullian  often  cites  the  homologoumena  in 
his  other  works.  Had  the  production  of  Justin,  entitled  De  mon- 
archia  Dei,  reached  us  entire,  in  which,  as  Eusebius  informs  us,^ 
he  quotes  not  only  Pagan  but  also  Christian  writings,  tag  nag  rifxlv 
yQa(fag,  i.  e.  our  Scriptures ;  or  had  his  work  against  Marcion, 
whom  he  could  not  refute  without  a  reference  to  St.  Paul,  escaped 
the  ravages  of  time  ;  we  doubt  not  that  we  should  have  it  in  our 
power  to  adduce  Justin  as  a  witness  for  others  of  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament. 

In  the  work  "  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  of  St. 
John,"^  the  author  shows  that  the  gospel  which  Justin  used,  and 
which  he  commonly  termed  dnofiv7]fiovfvfiaTa  zcov  dnoaiokmv,  and 


1  Euseb.  IV.  14.     Polycarp,  Epist.  §§  I.  II.  VIII, 

2  [Justin,  surnamed  the  Martyr,  was,  as  Methodius  states,  not  far  removed 
from  the  apostles  either  in  time  or  virtue.  Fabricius  supposes  he  was  born  about 
A.  D.  89 ;  and  the  time  of  his  martyrdom  is  variously  fixed  by  the  learned,  from 
A.  D.  164  to  168.     He  was  born  at  Sichem,  the  well  known  city  of  Samaria.  S.} 

3  Vide  Paulus'  Supplement  to  commentary  on  the  New-Testament,  p.  81  &c. 

4  Lib.  IV.  c.  18.  5  §  69.  p.  363—375, 


»§,  2.]  FRAGMENTS  OF  JUSTIN  MAUTYR.  2f9 

sometimes^  fvayytXtov,  and  which  Justin  moreover  says  was  com- 
posed by  apostles  of  Jesus  and  their  followers,  vno  anoazokotip 
'Jfjaov  xal  TcHv  aviolg  nuQanoXovxfi^aavtojv  avvticax^ai,^  was  a  Har- 
mony of  the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews  and  of  the  gospel  of  Luke.  The 
following  are  the  principal  arguments.  First :  it  is  certain  that  the 
gospel  of  Matthew  was  the  groundwork  from  which  Justin's  gospel 
was  composed ;  and  that  the  latter  contained  additions,  which  are 
not  found  in  any  of  our  gospels  ;  but  which  agree  with  additions 
found  in  the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews;  as  Stroth  has  proved  in  the 
Repertory  of  Biblical  and  oriental  literature  part  I.  Secondly ; 
Justin  was  a  native  of  Palestine,  where  the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews 
was  current ;  and  it  was  there  that  he  was  converted  to  Christianity. 
Thirdly  :  the  name  of  Justin's  gospel,  airo^ivri^ovev^aTa  zaiv  dnoG- 
ToXcDv,  coincides  with  the  appellation  "  E\  angelium  secundum  apos- 
tolos,"  by  which  the  gospel  of  the  Hebrews  is  also  denominated. 
Fourthly  :  it  is  an  indisputable  fact,  that  Justin's  gospel  contained 
many  passages  from  Luke  ;  as  Paulus  has  proved  in  his  "  Ex- 
egetisch-critische  Abhandlungen.  Fifthly  :  on  the  contrary,  it  can- 
not be  proved  that  any  passages  from  the  gospel  of  John  were  in- 
serted into  the  anof.ivefJLOvevf.iaTa  tojv  dnoaroXwv^  the  Memorabilia 
of  the  apostles.  Sixthly  :  Justin  does  not  quote  the  passaaje  Mark 
chap,  ni  verse  17,  from  the  dnof^v7]fiovevfiaGcta)v  anoatoktov,  but 
from  the  gospel  of  Mark  itself.  His  words  are  :^  "  And  when  it  is 
said  that  he  (Christ)  denominated  one  of  the  apostles  Peter,  and 
when  this  is  also  recorded  in  his  Memorabilia,  together  with  the 
fact  that  to  two  others,  who  were  brethren,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  he 
gave  the  name  sons  of  thunder"  &£c.  The  word  avtov  must  refer 
to  Peter,  and  designate  in  this  case  the  gospel  of  Mark.. 

Stroth  thinks  the  gospel  of  Justin  was  the  same  as  the  gospel  of 
the  Hebrews :  Paulus  regards  it  as  a  Harmony  of  our  four  gospels  : 
Miinscher*  thinks  it  was  a  Greek  translation  of  the  gospel  of  the 
Hebrews,  to  v\hich  some  additions  were  perhaps  made  from  the  gos- 
pels of  Matthew  and  Luke.  Eichhorn,  who  collected  the  fragments 
out  of  Justin's  gospel  entire,^  believes  that  it  was  formed^  out  of 
the  original  gospel  ;  that  it  resembled  our  Matthew  in  matter  and 
contents,  but  was  earlier  and  less  perfect.     Schmidt  is  of  opinion 

1  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  Jvdaeo,  Justini.  opp.  ed.  Colon    p.  227, 

2  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  ed.  cit.  p.  331. 

3  Kttl  TO  sinslv  fiBtfavofiocxsvaL  ctvxov  Ustqov  eva  tuv  anotnoXaVf  nav  yt- 
ygotcp^ai  iv  roig  anOfivrifiovBVfjLaGLv  ATTOT  xat  zovxo  fieza  tov  xal  akXovg 
8vo  adiXcpovgj  vlovg  Zs^sdaiov  ovTug,  fietwvofiaxsvai,  ovofiaxL  %ov  ^oavigysgy 
&c.     Dial,  cum  Tryph.  p.  333. 

4  Hiindbuch  der  christlichen  Dograengeschichte,  I  ter  theil,  2te  auflage,  Mar- 
purg,  1802  p.  296  «&c. 

5  Introduction  to  N.  Test,  part  I.  p.  513  &c.  6  p.  141  &c. 


40  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  {bK.  I. 

that  it  was  framed  by  an  enlargement  of  our  Matthew,  which  at  that 
time  had  not  fully  acquired  its  present  form.^  The  Reviewer  of 
Eichhorn's  Introduction,  pronounces  Justin's  gospel  to  be  the  gos- 
pel of  Matthew  enlarged  from  Luke  ;  and  observes,  that  those  ad- 
ditions in  Justin's  gospel,  which  are  not  found  in  Matthew  or  Luke, 
are  never  marked  as  quotations.  Hug  maintains,  that  the  ano^vrifjio- 
vev^ata  of  Justin  were  the  canonical  gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark  and 
Luke  ;  and  supposes,  that  Justin's  citation  of  facts  from  the  New 
Testament  was  not  literal,  but  free  and^  unrestrained.  And  finally, 
Feilmoser  endeavors  to  prove,  that  the  facts  in  the  life  of  our  Sav- 
iour mentioned  by  Justin,  in  some  instances  are  not  adduced  as 
citations,  and  in  others  are  narrated  in  terms  which  contain  only  the 
sense  of  the  corresponding  passages  in  our  gospels,  and  may  also  in 
some  cases  be  viewed  as  marginal  glosses.*^ 

4.  Irenaeus,*  who  lived  in  the  second  century,  in  his  books 
against  the  Gnostic  sects  of  christians,  quotes  very  many  passages 
from  all  the  homologoumena,  and  frequently  specifies  the  names  of 
their  authors :  only  from  the  epistle  to  Philemon  he  quotes  no  pas- 
sage, which  is  easily  accounted  for  by  the  contents  and  brevity  of 
that  epistle.  As  an  evidence  that  we  do  not  attach  too  high  impor- 
tance to  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus,  (which  acquires  the  greater  mo- 
ment from  the  fact  of  his  connexion  with  the  churches  in  Asia  Mi- 
nor, which  had  shortly  before  been  under  the  care  of  the  apostle 
John,  and  even  in  the  time  of  Irenaeus  embraced  some  who  had 
been  contemporary  with  the  apostles,)  we  shall  adduce  a  few  proofs. 
For  Matthew,  see  Lib.  III.  contra  Haereses  c.  9.  <§>  1,  2. 
For  Mark,  the  same.  c.  10,  <§»  6. 

For  the  gospel  of  Luke,  Lib.  III.  c.  10.  ^  1.  c  14.  <5.  3. 
For  the  gospel  of  John,  Lib.  III.  c.  11.  <§>  1.       Compare  the   Re- 
pertory for  Biblical  and  Oriental  Literature,  part  XIV.  p.  136  &c. 
For  the  four  Gospels,  Lib.  IIL  c.  1.  ^  1.  c.  11  <§.  8.  c.  15.  ^  1. 
For  the  Acts  of  the  apostles.  Lib.  III.  c.  14.  ^  1  c.  15.  <§»  1. 
For  the  epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans,  and  both  epistles  to  the  Co- 
rinthians, Lib.  Ill.c.  13.  <§.  1.  c.  16.  §  3.  9.  c.  18.  ^2.  3.  Lib. 
IV.  c.  26.  «§,  4. 

1  Introd.  N.  Test.  §  51.  p.  120  &c.  and  124  note  1. 

2  Introd.  to  the  books  of  the  New  Covenant,  Inspruck  1810,  §  62.  153  &c. 

3  Introd.  to  N.  Test,  part  II.  §.  23.  p.  74—80. 

4  [Neither  the  birth  nor  the  death  of  Irenaeus  can  be  determined  with  pre- 
cision. But*'  we  have  good  reason,"  says  Dr.  Lardner,  "  to  believe  that  he  was 
a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  that  he  was  presbyter  in  the  church  of  Lyons  under 
Pothinus,  whose  martyrdom  occured  A.  D.  177,  and  that  he  succeeded  Pothinus 
to  the  bishopric  of  that  church."  "  Irenaeus,"  says  the  same  excellent  writer, 
"though  his  writings  may  not  be  free  from  imperfection,  has  given  such  proofs 
of  learning,  good  sense  and  integrity  in  the  main,  that  all  good  judges  must  es- 
teem him  an  ornament  to  the  sect  he  was  of."  Lardner's  Credib.  pt.  II. 
B.  I.  c.  17.    S.]  ^ 


<5>  9.]  TESTIMONY  OF  IRENAEUS.  41 

For  the  epistles  to  the  Galaiians,  Ephesians,  FMUppians,  and  Co- 
lossians,  Lib.  III.  c.  7.  <5>  2.  c.  13.  «5>  3.  c.  16.  «5>  3.  c.  18.  «5>  3. 
Lib.V.  c.  13.  <5»  2—4.  Lib.  III.  c.  14.  <5»  1. 

For  both  epistles  to  the    Thessaloniansj  Lib.  V.  c.  6.  §  I.  Lib. 

III.  c.  6.  §  5.  c.  7.  ^  2. 
For  the  epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  Preface  to  Lib.  I.  §  1.  Lib. 

m.c.  3.  'S.S.  c.  14.  ^§.1.0.  3.  ^4. 
For  the  first  epistle  of  Peter  and  first  of  John,  Lib.  IV.  c.  9.  <^  2. 

Lib.  V.  c.  7  ^  2.  Lib.  III.  c.  16.  <§>  5,  8.^ 

The  credibility  of  Irenaeus'  testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
books  of  the  N.  Test,  is  vindicated  in  the  New  Apology  for  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John,^  against  objections  founded  on  some  un- 
guarded expressions  contained  in  his  books  against  the  Gnostics. 
In  a  work  published  since  the  appearance  of  the  Apology,  and  en- 
titled "a  Dissertation  on  the  true  and  secure  grounds  of  belief  of  the 
principal  facts  in  the  history  of  Jesus  ;  and  on  the  probable  origin 
of  the  gospels  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  Eckermann  has  at- 
tempted to  invalidate  the  evidence  of  Irenaeus  in  favour  of  the  gen- 
uineness of  our  four  gospels.^  The  works  in  reply  to  this  Disserta- 
tion are,  "  Reflections  on  the  origin  of  the  four  gospels  and  the  Acts 
of  the  apostles  ;'"^  and  a  communication  by  Professor  SUskind,  in 
Dr.  Flatfs  Magazine/'^  in  answer  to  the  question  "What  were  the 
grounds  on  which  Irenaeus  received  our  four  gospels  as  genuine?" 

Eckermann,  in  the  work  above  referred  to,  attempts  to  invalidate 
the  testimony  of  Irenaeus  by  saying :  "  Irenaeus,  in  the  first  place, 
appeals  in  general  terms,  to  the  unanimous  testimony  of  the  apostol- 
ical churches,  from  which  and  on  whose  authority  the  gospels  were 
received.  But  this  unanimous  testimony  of  the  christian  churches, 
is  nothing  but  the  results  of  the  first  councils,  held  between  A.  D. 
160  and  170  ;  and  which  agreed  in  receiving  our  four  gospels,  be- 
cause they  unanimously  believed  them  coincident  with  the  doctrinal 
traditions  of  the  apostolical  churches,  and  thence  concluded  there 
could  be  no  reason  to  doubt  the  fact,  that  these  books  were  actually  the 

1  It  is  unnecessary  to  quote  the  words  of  Irenaeus  in  the  passages  which  are 
here  referred  to,  and  in  which  he  cites  the  individual  books  of  the  N.  Test,  with  a 
specification  of  the  autkor's  name  ;  as  there  can  be  no  dispute  about  them.  They 
are  contained,  together  with  others,  in  Caraerer's  Theologischen  und  kritischea 
Versuciien,  Stuttgard  1794.     2nd  Dissertation  on  the  canon  of  the  N.  Test.  §  7. 

2  p.  142—164.  and  the  work  Ueber  den  Zweck  der  evang.  Geschichte  Johannis 
etc.  p.  89—94,  247—249. 

3  Theologische  BeytrSge  Vol.  V.  pt.  2.  1796.  p.  171—176. 184—197  comp.  p. 
124—13.5. 

4  "  Siaudlin's  Contributions  to  the  history  of  the  doctrines  of  religion  and 
morality,"  p.  185 — 192,  where  the  teetimonj  of  Irenaeus  19  vindicated. 

5No.  6.p  95— 139. 

6 


42  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  1, 

productions  of  the  persons  to  whom  they  were  ascribed.  And  since 
the  time  of  these  councils,  the  major  part  of  the  christian  churches 
acknowledged  them  as  the  gospels  of  the  persons  whose  names 
they  bear.  Secondly  :  Irenaeus  himself  appeals  to  the  coincidence 
of  the  four  gospels  with  the  doctrinal  traditions,  which  were  the  best 
source  and  the  appropriate  criterion  of  the  truth. — Thus  the  force 
of  the  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of  our  gospels  must  at  last  rest 
on  their  coincidence  with  the  oral  tradition  of  doctrines,  which 
came  down  to  them  without  interruption  from  the  lips  of  the  apos- 
tles. Irenaeus  does  not  mention  the  churches,  from  which  an  ac- 
count of  the  genuineness  of  our  gospels  was  derived  ;  nor  does  he 
name  any  individuals  who  obtained  such  information  from  the  lips 
of  an  apostle,  or  from  one  personally  acquainted  with  an  apostle^ 
It  is  therefore,  impossible  that  such  traditiones  ecclesiasticae  (tradi- 
tions of  the  church)  should  have  any  weight  before  the  tribunal  of 
impartial  historical  criticism.  For  they  are  too  young  to  afford  va- 
lid evidence  of  such  a  fact :  and  they  are  moreover  not  only  contra- 
dicted by  learned  critics,  such  as  Marcion ;  but  it  can  be  evinced 
from  satisfactory  testimony,^  that  at  the  commencement  of  the  se- 
cond century,  these  written  accounts  were  not  regarded  as  so  unques- 
tionable but  that  the  oral  accounts  of  persons  conversant  with  the 
apostles,  were  preferred  to  them,  as  more  indubitable  sources  of  in- 
formation." 

The  principal  arguments  by  which  these  objections  of  Eckermann 
are  met  in  the  works  above  referred  to,  are  the  following.  First,  no 
passage  can  be  found  in  Irenaeus,  from  which  it  might  be  inferred 
with  even  the  semblance  of  truth,  that  he  received  our  four  gospels, 
on  account  of  their  coincidence  with  the  doctrinal  traditions.  Se- 
condly, the  object  of  Irenaeus,  in  his  books  against  the  Gnostics,  is 
not  to  establish  the  genuineness  of  the  gospels,  but  their  validity. 
Their  genuineness  he  presupposed  as  admitted;  for  the  heretics  against 
whom  he  was  contending  did  not  deny  the  genuineness  of  the  gos- 
pels, but  disputed  the  authority  of  some  of  them.  Thus  in  the  case 
of  Marcion,  the  assertion  that  he  denied  the  genuineness  of  the  gos- 
pels is  demonstrably  false,  as  appears  from  the  most  explicit  passa- 
ges of  Irenaeus  and  Tertullian.  Thirdly,  but  even  admitting  the  fact 
that  Irenaeus  rather  assumes  than  proves  the  genuineness  of  our  gos- 
pels ;  still  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  he  had  good  historical  ground 
for  this  assumption.  Tlie  assumption  itself  may  therefore,  without 
doubt,  justly  be  regarded  as  important  historical  evidence.     Fourth- 

1  The  tesiimony^alluded  to  is  that  of  Papias.  who  says  :  ov  rd  in  ztor  ^t^lioiv 
TOOovTov  fie  (Ifpelflv  vnakd/u^avov  oaov  id  rraQa  iOJar^g  (ptovtjg  nal  fisvovarji  i.  e.  I 
did  not  think  that  I  should  be  profited  as  much  by  what  I  could  learn  from  writ- 
ten records,  as  by  the  oral  instructions  of  living  persons. 


^  2.]  TESTIMONY  OF  IRENAEUS.  43 

/y,  the  hypothesis  that  Irenaeus  received  the  four  gospels  as  genuine 
on  the  authority  of  certain  councils,  rests  on  a  mere  fiction.  For, 
the  supposition  that  the  reception  of  the  historical  books  of  the  New 
Testament  was  agreed  on  in  the  councils  which  met  between  A.  D. 
160  and  170,  and  by  this  agreement  became  a  dogma  of  the  whole 
catholic  church ;  is  not  only  utterly  destitute  of  proof,  but  is  in  itself, 
in  the  highest  degree  improbable.'  But  even  if  this  pretended  fact 
were  true,  still  such  a  choice  of  our  gospels  would  be  entitled  to  a 
very  high  degree  of  respect ;  because  it  could  not  be  supposed  that 
a  traditionary  opinion  relative  to  the  origin  of  the  gospels,  which 
was  a  mere  unfounded  report  very  recently  sprung  up,  could  have 
been  disseminated  universally  and  without  alteration,  and  have  exert- 
ed an  influence  on  all  the  provincial  synods  inducing  them  to  make 
one  and  the  same  selection  of  books.^  Fifthly^  Irenaeus  was  con- 
nected with  several  churches.  At  Lyons,  in  Gaul,  he  was  first 
Presbyter  and  then  Bishop  ;  and  according  to  Eusebius,^  he  and  his 
church  maintained  a  correspondence  with  the  Roman  church.  Ire- 
naeus attached  peculiar  weight  to  the  opinion  of  the  churches  at 
Smyrna  and  Ephesus  ;  of  the  former,  because  Polycarp,  who  was 
the  disciple  of  the  Apostle  John,  and  had  personally  known  him  in 
his  early  youth,  [6v  iajgaxafAev  xat  i^f-ieJg  iv  vrj  ngwrrj  fjfAOJv  i^XiKia,^) 
was  bishop  of  Smyrna ;  and  of  the  latter,  because  the  apostle  John 
resided  at  Ephesus  until  the  time  of  Trajan.*  And  it  is  very  pro- 
bable from  the  passage  referred  to,  as  well  as  from  Euseb.  V.  1-3,  that 
even  when  he  resided  in  Gaul,  he  still  was  connected  with  these 
churches  in  Asia  Minor.  He  moreover  sometimes  appeals  to  the 
testimony  of  persons  who  had  personal  intercourse  with  St.  John 
and  other  apostles.^  And  consequently,  in  an  age  only  60  or  70 
years  remote  from  the  apostolical,  he  had  abundant  opportunity  to 

1  Compare  "  Reflections  on  the  origin  of  the  gospels  and  Acts  of  the  apostles," 
in  Staudlin's  BeylrSge  Vol.  V.  p.  195—201.  Schmidt's  Introduction  to  the  N. 
Test,  parti.  §  13.  "Montanism  took  its  rise  soon  afler  the  middle  of  the  2nd 
century,  and  in  a  short  time  spread  from  Phrygia  to  Gaul  and  Carthage.  The 
Montanists  and  their  opponents  could  certainly  not  have  combined  for  the  pur- 
pose of  raising  the  same  books  to  canonical  authority.  But  as  they  both  used 
our  gospels,  it  is  evident  that  they  must  have  been  received  as  canonical  at  an 
earlier  date.  And  the  history  of  the  contentions  concerning  the  exact  time 
when  Easter  should  be  kept,  evinces  that  in  the  second  century,  no  synods  pos- 
sessed sufficient  influence  to  effect  a  harmony  of  opinions  among  christians — 
and  hence  it  cannot  have  been,  that  to  the  synods  of  this  century  we  are  indebt- 
ed for  the  settling  of  the  canon." 

2  See  the  author's  Dissertation  on  the  Question  "  Did  Jesus  profess  that  his 
miracles  were  a  proof  of  the  divinity  of  his  mission  .?"  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Vol. 
IV.  p.  236,  etc.  3  Hist.  Eccl.  V.  4. 24. 

4  Iren.  Adv.  Ha'^res.  III.  c.  3.  §  4.  Compare  the  epistle  of  Irenaeus  to  Florinus, 
preserved  in  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  V.  c.  20. 
^  Advers.  Haeres.  lib.  III.  c.  3.  §  4. 
6  Adv.  Haeresea  L.  II.  c.  22.  §  5.  Lib.  V.  c.  30.  §  h  .i*I  ,iin^  fi%iU,,iitH»^  i 


44  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  IV 

obtain  satisfactory  and  indisputable  testimony  on  the  genuineness  of 
our  gospels.  And  even  if  he  does,  by  some  incredible  narratives, 
prove  himself  an  injudicious  historian,  he  may  nevertheless  be  regard- 
ed as  a  perfectly  valid  witness  when  the  subject  of  investigation  is 
the  simple  historical  question,  whether  a  particular  book  of  the  New 
Testament  was  acknowledged  or  assumed  to  be  genuine,  by  persons 
and  churches  who  must  have  had  a  knowledge  of  the  fact.  Sixth" 
ly  that  our  gospels  are  supposititious,  can  by  no  means  be  inferred 
with  any  justice  from  the  words  of  Papias,  ov  t«  /x  tmv  ^l^XIwv  to- 
Gomov  f48  MifeXilv  vnslocfA^ai^ov,  onov  t«  nuQa  ^coarig  (jp(oi>7Jg  xal 
fisvovoTjg,  i.  e.  I  thought  I  should  not  be  profited  as  much  by  what  I 
could  learn  from  written  records,  as  by  the  oral  instructions  of  living 
persons ;  for  which  purpose  this  is  quoted  by  Eckermann  in  the  ex- 
tract given  above.  For  it  would  be  a  rash  conclusion  indeed  to  in- 
fer from  the  declarations  of  Papias,  the  universal  opinion  of  the 
Christians  of  bis  day.  Again  ;  the  very  passage,'  part  of  which  is 
above  quoted,  contains  a  very  respectful  and  circumstantial  testimo- 
ny for  the  genuineness  of  the  gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  More- 
over, the  fact  that  Papias  does  not  quote  the  gospel  of  St.  John 
which  was  very  probably  published  at  rather  a  late  period  in  Ephe- 
sus  near  Hierapolis,  where  Papias  was  bishop,  is  very  easily  ac- 
counted for  ;  because  it  was  the  object  of  Papias  in  composing  his 
five  books,  to  take  his  materials  not  from  written  but  from  oral  ac-  ' 
counts  :  and  because  he  had  it  not  in  his  power  to  state  anecdotes 
relative  to  the  origin  of  this  gospel,  as  he  did  of  that  of  Matthew 
and  Mark,  since  it  had  been  but  lately  published  in  this  country. 
Finally,  it  is  not  probable  that  Papias  intended  our  gospels  by  the 
written  records,  from  which  he  did  not  anticipate  as  much  profit  as 
from  the  oral  accounts  of  the  contemporaries  of  the  apostles.  It  is 
highly  probable  that  St.  John,  when  he  composed  his  gospel  in  Asia 
Minor,  presupposed  in  his  readers  a  knowledge  of  the  other  three 
evangelists  Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke  ;  as  is  proved  in  the  work 
"  On  the  object  of  the  gospel  history  of  John"  ^J*'^'  70.  71.  These 
three  gospels  then  must  have  circulated  and  have  been  known  in 
Asia  Minor ;  and  consequently  the  object  of  Papias  in  the  compo- 
sition of  his  five  books,  could  not  have  been  to  repeat  those  incidents 
and  sayings  of  Jesus  which  had  long  been  rendered  familiar  by 
those  gospels.  And  hence,  as  his  professed  object  was  to  collect 
accounts  relative  to  Jesus  which  were  not  yet  generally  known,  he 
had  no  occasion  to  inform  us  that  he  could  make  more  use  of  oral 
accounts  than  of  the  written  gospels,  for  the  gospels  contained  no 
such  accounts.  But  this  remark  of  Papias  is  a  favourable  one,  if 
the  idea  which  he  meant  to  convey  was  this  :    that  he  preferred  ob- 

1  Eseub.  Hist.  Eccl.  III.  39. 


«§>  2.]  FRAGMENTS  OF  TERTULLIAN.  45 

tainiiig  his  information  personally  from  the  contemporaries  of  the 
apostles,  who  were  yet  living,  rather  than  from  the  Apocryphal 
gospels,  whose  authors  were  unknown  and  for  whose  statements  he 
was  not  ahle  to  vouch. ^  But  even  admitting  that  by  written  records 
he  actually  meant  our  gospels,  still  his  words  would  not  express  his 
disapprobation  of  them,  but  only  assert  that  the  oral  accounts  of  the 
contemporaries  of  the  apostles  were  more  interesting  to  him  individ- 
ually and  personally ;  and  how  perfectly  natural  is  this  in  a  person 
who  was  fond  of  anecdotes  !^ 

It  appears  therefore  that  the  objections  to  the  testimony  of  Ire- 
naeus  possess  but  little  force,  and  that  its  validity  remains  unshaken, 

5.  Theophilus,^  of  Antioch,  in  the  second  century.  He  mentions 
John  as  the  author  of  a  gospel  f  and  he  also  composed  a  harmony 
of  our  four  gospels,  if  we  can  credit  the  words  of  Jerome.^  Theoph- 
ilus  (he  says)  Antiochenae  ecclesiae  septimus  post  Petrum  aposto- 
lura  Episcopus,  qui  quatuor  Evangelistarum  in  unum  opus  dicta 
compingens  ingenii  sui  monumenta  nobis  dimisit,  etc.  i.  e.  Theoph- 
ilus,  the  seventh  bishop  of  Antioch  after  the  apostle  Peter,  has 
left  us  a  specimen  of  his  genius  in  his  production,  combining  the 
contents  of  the  four  gospels  into  one  work. 

6.  Athenagoras  of  the  second  century,  ascribes  both  of  the  epis- 
tles to  the  Corinthians  to  an  apostle,  whom  Hermias  calls  Paul,  in 
his  work  against  the  heathen  philosophers  entitled  diaaugfiog  kov 
i'lo)  (pdoa6(f  ojv^  i.  e.  ridicule  of  the  philosophers  without  the  church. 
Athenagoras,  de  Resurrectione,^  says.  It  is  therefore  clearly  evident, 
according  to  the  declaration  of  the  apostle,  that  this  corruptible 
and  dissolvable  must  put  on  incorruption,  in  order  that,  being  quick- 
ened by  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  parts  which  were  sep- 
arated and  scattered  about  every  where  being  again  united,  each 
one  may  justly  receive  the  things  done  in  the  body,  whether  they  be 
good  or  bad  J 

1  Vide  the  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  in  Flatt's  Magazine  Vol.  IV.  p.  245,  etc. 

2  See  the  dissert,  in  Staudlin  s  Beitrage,  Vol.  V.  p.  176,  etc. 

3  [Theophilus  was  the  seventh  bishop  of  Antioch  after  the  apostle  Peter,  as 
Eusebius  informs  us,  and  was  made  bishop  A.  D.  168.  His  predecessors  were 
Euodius,  Ignatius,  Heros,  Cornelius  and  Eros;  and  his  death  occurred  shortly 
after  A.  D.  181.     S.] 

4  L.  II.  ad.  Antolycum.  5  Epist.  ad  Algasiam  Quaest.  6. 
6  page  61.  edit.  Coloniensis. 

"^  £v$r)Xov  navrl  to  Xunofisj'ov  oxi>  8u  ^ata,  top  an  6<jt  oXov, 
TO  (p^  aqxov  Tovxo  xat  dLaaxedaarov  iv  dv  a  a(T&  at  acp-d^aqalav, 
tVa  ^(aonoiTj^svrwv  i$  avacrrdasag  twv  vtHQtad-ivxtav  anl  TcdXiv  kva&ivxoiv  twv 
xsx(ogi(j[iiv(av  t)  teal  ndvxr}  diaXslvfiivwv  ex  aat  og  tco  filatjx  ai>  8i- 
Mfdag,  a  did  xov  aa^jbato  q  titq  a^sv^  sVxs  d/cc&a  si't&  xctxd. 


46  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  (bK.  I. 

The  words  to — acpd^agalav  and  'Iva — xaxct,  are  taken,  the  former 
from  1  Cor.  15 :  53,  the  latter  from   2  Cor.  5  :  10. 

7.  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  in  the  second  century  makes  very 
copious  citations  from  all  the  homologoumena,  excepting  only  the 
epistle  to  Philemon. 

8.  TertuUian,  presbyter  of  Carthage,  in  the  second  century,  at- 
tributes the  historical  books  of  the  New  Testament,  the  twelve  epis- 
tles of  Paul,  (which  Irenaeus  also  cites  as  productions  of  Paul,)  the 
epistle  to  Philemon  and  the  first  epistle  of  Peter  and  first  of  John,  to 
the  same  persons  who  are  commonly  regarded  as  their  authors. 

TertuUian,  of  Western  Africa,^  being  the  most  ancient  Latin  wri- 
ter that  has  reached  us,  is  entitled  to  particular  attention.^  Among 
the  important  passages  for  the  genuineness  of  the  writings  of  the  New 
Testament,  are  the  following. 

First ;  concerning  the  historical  books  of  the  New  Testament,  he 
says  :  "  In  the  first  place,  I  consider  it  as  established,  that  the  pro- 
ductions termed  the  gospels,  were  written  by  the  apostles  to  whom 
the  Lord  himself  committed  this  charge  of  publishing  the  gospel ; 
but  if  companions  of  the  apostles  were  also  concerned  in  them,  they 
nevertheless  did  not  act  alone,  but  in  conjunction  with  the  apostles, 
and  following  them  as  guides  ;  because  the  publications  of  the  disci- 
ples of  the  apostles  might  be  exposed  to  the  imputation  of  ambitious 
views,  if  the  authority  of  their  instructors,  yea  even  that  of  Christ 
himself,  which  made  their  instructors  apostles,  did  not  support  them. 
In  a  word  we  are  taught  the  faith  by  the  apostles  John  and  MaU 
thewj  and  it  is  confirmed  to  us  by  their  disciples  Luke  and  MarJc"^ 

In  Another  passage  he  says  :  "  In  short,  if  it  is  evident  that  that 
is  the  more  true  which  is  the  more  ancient,  and  that  the  more  an- 
cient which  is  from  the  beginning,  and  that  from  the  beginning  which 
was  derived  from  the  apostles  ;  then  it  will  in  like  manner  be  evi- 
dent, that  what  the  apostolical  churches  held  as  inviolably  sacred, 
they  received  from  the  apostles. — I  assert  therefore,  that  the  Gos- 
pel of  Luke,  which  I  defend"^  to  the  utmost,  was  from  its  first  publi- 
cation, in  possession  of  these  (churches)  ;  and  not  only  of  the  apos- 

1  Schmidt  sup.  cit.  p.  26. 

2  Compare  "  HSnlein's  Manual,  being  anintrod.  to  N.  Test.  Erlanffen,1794, 
part.  I.  p.  85—87. 

3  Gonstituimas  in  primis,  evangelicum  instrumentum  Apostolos  auctores 
habere,  quibus  hoc  munus  evangelii  promulgandi  ab  ipso  Domino  sitimpositum  ; 
si  et  apostolicos,  non  tamen  solos,  sed  cum  apostolis,  et  post  apostolos ;  quoniam 
praedicatio  discipulorum  suspecta  fieri  posset  de  gloriae  studio,  si  non  assistat 
illi  autoritas  magistrorum,  imo  Christi,  quae  magistros  apostolos  fecit.  Denique 
nobis  fidem  ex  apostolis  Johannes  et  Matthaeus  insinuant,  ex  apostolicis  Lucas 
et  Marcus  instaurant."     Lib.  IV.  adv.  Marcionem,  c.  2.  J." 

4  He  defended  the  unadulterated  Gospel  of  Luke  against  the  Bpurious  one  «if * 


^  2.]  FRAGMENTS  OF  TERTULLIAN.  47 

tolical  (churches)  but  also  of  all  which  are  united  with  them  in  the 
bonds  of  a  common  faith. — The  same  authority  of  the  apostolical 
churches  support  also  the  other  Gospels,  which  we  have  likewise 
received  through  them,  and  in  the  form  in  which  they  had  them ; 
namely  the  Gospels  of  John  and  of  Matthetv :  and  likewise  that  of 
Mark,  which  is  ascribed  to  Peter,  whose  interpreter  Mark  was. — 
And  thus  the  digest  of  Luke  is  commonly  ascribed  to  Paul ;  for  it 
is  customary  to  ascribe  to  the  teachers,  what  their  students  publish- 
ed." ^ The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  quoted  by  Tertullian  under 

the  title  of  Acta  Apostolorum,*  and  Commentarius  Lucae.^      1;(/ir; 

Eckermann,  who  quotes^  this  testimony  of  Tertullian  for  the 
genuineness  of  our  Gospels,  makes  an  attempt  toinvahdate  its  force. 
He  says  :^  *'  Before  such  an  appeal  to  the  testimony  of  the  apos- 
tolical church  can  possess  any  weight,  it  is  necessary  that  it  should 
be  specifically  stated,  that  according  to  the  tradition  preserved  in 
some  particular  church,  Luke  did,  at  a  specified  time  deliver  the 
Gospel  into  the  hands  of  that  church  ;  or  that  some  friend  of  Luke, 
seeing  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts  of  the  apostles  in  the  hands  of 
Luke,  heard  him  declare,  with  his  own  lips,  that  he  actually  wrote 
them,"  etc.  But  the  principal  ground  on  which  TertulHan  builds 
all  that  he  says,  is  this  :  "  The  testimony  of  the  church  must  be 
regarded  as  infallible ;  and  she  has  decided  in  favour  of  the  four 
Gospels.  The  truth  of  the  traditionary  opinion  of  the  apostolic 
churches  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  the  apostles  were  their  first 
teachers ;  as  though  it  would  follow  that  after  the  lapse  of  150 
years,  every  thing  in  them  were  still  apostolic."^ 

In  opposition  to  this,  the  author  of  '*  Reflections  on  the  origin  of 
the  Gospels  and  Acts  of  the  apostles"^  remarks,  that  Tertullian 
appeals,  not  to  the  doctrinal,  but  the  historical  tradition  of  the 
churches,  which  the  apostles  founded,  and  to  which  they  committed 
their  writings.  This  the  whole  connexion  shows.  In  this  very 
context,  he  says  :  "  We  have  also  the  support  of  the  churches  of 
John ;  for  although  Marcion  rejected  the  Revelation  of  John,  the 
whole  succession  of  bishops  from  the  beginning,  will  testify  that 

1  In  summa,  si  constat,  id  verius,  quod  prius,  id  prius,  quod  et  ab  initio,  ab 
initio  quod  ab  Apostolis,  pariter  utique  constabit,  id  esse  ab  apostolis  tradituin, 
quod  apud  Ecclesias  apostolorum  fuerit  sacrosanclum. — Dico  itaque  apud  illas 
(ecclesias,)  nee  solum  jam  apostolicas,  sed  apud  universas,  quae  illis  de  societate 
sacrament!  confoederantur,  id  evangelium  Lucae  ab  initio  editionis  suae  stare, 
quod  cum  maxime  tuemur.  Eadem  auctoritas  ecclesiarum  Apostolicarum  caete- 
ris  quoque  patrocinabitur  evangeliis,  quae  proinda  per  illas  et  secundum  illas 
habemus,  Johannis  dico  et  Matthaei  :  licet  et  Marcus  quod  edidit,  Petri  affirma- 
tur,  cujus  interpres  Marcus.  Nam  et  Lucae  digestum  Paulo  adscribere  solent  ; 
capit  magistrorum  videri  quae  discipuli  promulgarint.  Lib.  IV.  adv.  Marcion.  c.  5. 

2  Adv.  Marc.  V.  1.  3  De  Jejunio  c.  10.  4  Sup.  cit.  202—205. 
5  Sup.  cit.  204  &c.                    6  Staudlin's  Beytragen,  Vol.  V.  p.  192  &c. 


48  GENUINENESS  Of  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I, 

John  was  the  author."^  In  order  to  prove  that  the  Marcionite 
Gospel  of  Luke  is  spurious,  he  remarks  in  the  same  passage  :  "  But 
Marcion's  (Gospel  of  Luke)  is  unknown  to  most  persons  ;  and  it  is 
known  to  none  but  as  originating  with  him."^  Of  the  other  Gos- 
pels he  says :  "  We  have  received  them  from  the  apostolical 
churches,  and  hare  precisely  their  text  of  them."^  It  appears 
therefore  that  there  is  nothing  said  relative  to  a  decision  of  the 
apostolical  churches,  in  favour  of  the  Gospels ;  but  of  the  trans- 
mission of  those  writings,  which  they  originally  received  as  the 
productions  of  the  apostles,  unaltered,  to  other  churches.  The 
passage  of  Tertullian  cited  below^  may  also  be  consulted  as  proof 
that  he  refers  to  historical  tradition.^  But  Eckermann  has  him- 
self retracted  the  above-mentioned  objections  against  the  force  of 
the  tradition  of  the  church,  in  the  preface  to  his  work  entitled 
"  Explanation  of  all  the  obscure  passages  of  the  New  Testament."^ 
He  says :  "  The  fact  can  admit  of  no  dispute,  that  in  the  churches 
founded  by  the  apostles,  it  could  be  known,  which  reputed  writings 
of  an  apostle  were  genuine  and  which  were  spurious.  And  it  is  a 
remarkable  fact,  which  places  the  integrity  of  the  witnesses  for  the 
genuineness  of  our  canonical  Gospels  in  the  clearest  light,  that  there 
have  been  transmitted  to  us  but  two  Gospels  composed  by  apostles, 
and  two  others  composed  by  disciples  of  apostles.  Had  the  names 
under  which  they  were  submitted  to  the  world,  been  fictitious,  why 
were  not  all  the  Gospels  ascribed  to  apostles,  rather  than  to  persons 
who  had  only  been  their  scholars?" 

One  other  objection  raised  against  the  validity  of  historical  tradi- 
tion as  supporting  the  homologoumena,  is  this  :  that  in  the  earliest 
times,  tradition  supported  as  genuine  and  apostolical  some  books 
which  were  afterwards  proved  to  be  supposititious  ;  and  therefore  it 
can  possess  no  weight  in  the  balance  of  historical  investigation.  A 
reply  to  this  objection  the  reader  will  find  in  Flatt's  Magazine."'   ''V 

Secondly,  as  to  the  Ejnstles  of  Paul.  The  two  epistles  to  the 
Corinthians,  the  two  to  the  Thessalonians,  the  first  to  Timothy, 
and  those  to  the  Galatians,  the  Romans,  Ephesians  and  the  Colos- 
sians,  are  quoted,  by  Tertullian,  De  pudicitia,  c.  13 — 19.  The 
second  epistle  to  Timothy  is  cited,  in  Scorpiacum  contra  Gnosticos, 

1  Habemus  et  Johannis  ecclesias  alumnas.  Nam  etsi  Apocalypsim  ejus  Mar- 
cion  respuit,  ordo  tamen  episcoporum  ad  originem  recensus  in  Johannem  stabit 
autoretn. 

2  Marcionis  vero  (Evangeliuna  Lueae)  plerisqu«  nee  notum;  nullis  notum,  ut 
non  eodera  natum. 

3  Habemus  per  ecclesias  apostolicas,  et  secundum  illas. 

4  De  praescript,  haereticorum,  c.  36. 

5  Compare  Flatt's  Magazine,  Ypl.  IX,  p.  .31—33.        6  VoLJ.  n.  VII.      ,  ^ 

'  Stuck  IX.  s.  2-47.         ■■■'^.'^--■^•'  .   .^.*^.ho.^.;c   ^ 


«5>  2.]  INTERNAL  EVIDENCE.  49 

c.  13.  The  epistle  to  Titus,  in  Praescriptiones  haereticorum,  c.  6. 
And  that  to  the  Philippians,  in  the  fifth  book  against  Marcion,  c.  20. 
And  throughout  the  whole  of  this  fifth  book,  the  epistles  of  Paul  are 
frequently  quoted. 

The  same  book,  c.  21.  contains  a  remark  relative  to  an  epistle, 
which,  though  Philemon  is  not  named  in  the  text,  could  have  been 
no  other  than  that  addressed  to  him.  "  This  epistle  alone  was 
shielded  by  its  brevity  from  the  falsifying  hands  of  Marcion.  Yet  it 
is  strange,  as  Marcion  received  this  epistle  to  an  individual,  that  he 
should  reject  the  two  to  Timothy  and  the  one  to  Titus."^ 

The  first  epistle  to  Peter  is  cited,  in  Scorpiac.  c.  12.  14.  and  the 
first  epistle  of  John,  de  pudicitia,  c.  19.  In  addition  to  these  pas- 
sages, we  will  insert  that  above  mentioned,  contained  in  his  Prae- 
script.  Haereticorum,  c.  36.  "  Pass  through  all  the  apostolical 
churches,  in  which  the  seats  of  the  apostles  are  still  filled,  and  in 
which  their  genuine  ^  epistles  are  publicly  read,  by  which  their 
voice  continues  to  sound,  and  their  countenances  are  still  exhibited. 
Is  Achala  nearest  to  you  ?  Corinth  is  not  distant.  If  you  are  but  little 
removed  from  Macedonia,  Philippi  is  there.  If  you  can  go  to  Asia, 
you  have  there  Ephesus.    But  if  you  adjoin  Italy,  Rome  is  at  hand."  ^ 

Fragments  of  Cains,  who  lived  in  the  beginning  of  the  third  cen- 
tury. According  to  Eusebius,'^  Caius,  attributed  thirteen  epistles  to 
Paul ;  whom  he  terms  {ie^ov  dnoaiokov)  the  holy  apostle. 

III.  6.  The  internal  evidence  is  wholly  in  favour  of  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  hooks  of  the  New  Testament : — they  contain  noth- 
ing incongrums  with  the  age  or  other  circumstances  in  which 
they  were  written. 

Michaelis  has  clearly  shown,  that  the  style  of  the  books  of  the 

'  Soli  huic  epistolae  brevitas  sua  profuit  utfalsarias  manus  Marcionis  evaderet. 
Miror  tamen,cum  ad  unum  hominern  literas  factas  receperit  (Marcion ,)  quod  ad 
Timotheum  duas,  et  unarn  ad  Titum,  recusaverit. 

2  Schmidt  (Introd.  N.  Test.  II.  BO.)  doubts  whether  the  ai.tographs  of  the  apos- 
tolical epistles  be  meant  here.  Hug,  (Introd.  I.  93.)  thinks  the  phrase  "  literae 
authenticae  "  sigmfies  genuine  unadulterated  epistles;  and  appeals,  in  support  of 
this  signification  of  the  word  «M«/tC7i^«CM5,  to  the  passage  de  monogamia,  c.  11. 
[The  learned  Dr.  Lardner  (Works,  v.  II.  p.  167 — 8.  ed.  Svo.)  expresses  his  opin- 
ion thus  :  "TertuUian,  by  '  authentic  letters,'  does  not  mean  the  original  epistles. 
Nor  does  he  mean  letters  in  their  original  language.  But  by  authentic^  he  seems 
to  mean  certain,  well  attested;  the  Greek  word  is  so  used  by  Cicero  :  and  by 
authenticae  literae  we  are  not  to  understand  authentic  letters  or  epistles,  but 
''scriptures  ;'  so  the  word  ought  in  my  opinion  to  be  rendered."  And  in  support 
of  each  of  these  propositions,  he  as  usual  adduces  his  reasons.     S.] 

3  "  Percurre  ecclesias  apostolicas,  apud  quas  ispae  adhuc  cathedrae  apostolo- 
nim  suis  locis  praesidentur,  apud  quas  authenticae  literae  eorum  recitantur,  son- 
antes  vocem,  repraesentantes  faciem.  Proxima  est  tibi  Achaia  :  habes  Corinth- 
um.  Si  non  longe  es  a  Macedonia,  habes  Philippos.  Si  potes  in  Asiam  tendere, 
habes  Ephesum.     Si  autem  ItaJiae  adjiceris,  habes  Romani. 

<  Hist.  Eccl.  VI.  30. 

7 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.   I. 


New  Testament  is  an  internal  proof  of  their  genuineness  ;^  and  he 
has  proved,  that  the  historical  data  of  the  New  Testament  accord, 
even  in  the  most  minute  circumstances,  with  the  history  of  the  time 
in  which  they  were  said  to  be  written. ^  He  has  likewise  answered 
several  objections,  derived  from  the  actual  or  apparent  contradictions 
between  other  historians,  especially  Josephus,  and  the  narratives  of 
the  New  Testament.  Compare  on  this  subject,  the  very  complete 
enumeration  of  the  internal  evidences  for  the  genuineness  of  the 
New  Testament  writings,  in  Hanlein^s  Introduction  to  the  New 
Testament,^  and  in  Kleuker's  "  Full  investigation  of  the  evidences 
for  the  genuineness  and  credibility  of  the  original  records  of  Chris- 
tianity."^ These  internal  evidences  for  the  genuineness  of  the 
writings  of  the  New  Testament,  are  compressed  into  a  narrow  space, 
in  Griesinger's  Introduction  to  the  books  of  the  New  Covenant ;  * 
and  select  remarks  on  this  subject,  may  be  found  in  Hug's  Intro- 
duction. ^ 

The  Gospels  o{  Matthew  and  McrrA:,  like  the  other  Gospels,  con- 
tain nothing  which  can  be  regarded  even  as  an  inferential,  negative 
proof  of  their  spuriousness.  Ex^kermann,  in  his  "  Theologische  Bei- 
trage"  has,  indeed,  attempted  to  prove  the  Gospels  and  Acts  not  gen- 
uine, by  internal  evidence.  But  his  arguments  are  refuted,  in  the 
"  Reflections  on  the  origin  of  the  four  Gospels  and  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  '^  and  in  the  Dissertation  of  Storr,  on  the  question  :  "  Did 
Jesus  represent  his  miracles  to  be  a  proof  of  the  divinity  of  his 
mission  ?  "^ 

The  principal  objections  of  Ekermann,  together  with  the  answers 
to  them  contained  in  these  dissertations,  are  the  following  : 

Objection  1.  The  illiterate  disciples  of  Jesus  could  not  well  have 
possessed  any  skill  in  writing.  Matthew  alone,  having  been  a  pub- 
lican, may  have  been  an  exception. 

Reply.  We  have  no  authority  for  asserting  that  the  disciples  of 
Jesus  were  wholly  unable  to  write ;  although  their  artless  narratives 
may  prove  that  they  were  not  acquainted  with  the  artificial  rules  of 
composition."^  Again  ;  they  may,  like  Paul,  have  dictated  their 
works  to  others,  who  served  as  their  amanuenses.^*^  Eckermann  is 
inconsistent  with  himself;  for  he  admits  that  the  groundwork  of  the 

1  Introduction  to  N.  Test.  §  4. 10.  11.  12. 

9  See  also  Hug's  Introduction  to  the  N.  Test.  p.  12—24.  Andover  ed. 

3  Pt.  f.  §  3-6.  p.  41—70.  4  Vol.  I.  and  Vol.  III.  pt.  I.  p.  32—104. 

5  p.  7.  8.  Stuttgard,  1799.  6  Pt,  I.  §  3_5. 

7  Staudlin's  BeitrSge,  vol.  V.  p.  156—163. 

8  Flatt's  Mag.  pt.  IV.  p.  234  etc. 

9  Staudlin's  Beitrage,  sup.  cit.  p.  1.56  etc. 

10  Flatt's  Mag.  sup.  cit.  p.  250.    Staudlin's  Beitrage,  p.  157. 


^  2.]  INTERNAL  EVIDENCE.  51 


Gospels  of  MaltheWj  Luke  and  John,  like  that  of  the  Acts  jo(  the 
Apostles,  was  the  composition  of  those  very  men ;  though  he  sup- 
poses they  were  re-written  at  a  subsequent  period,  and  much  enr 
larged  by  spurious  additions.^ 

Objection  2.  Prior  to  the  commencement  of  the  second  century, 
there  was  no  necessity  for  written  records  of  the  life  and  doctrines 
of  Jesus. 

Reply.  The  inference  of  the  non-existence  of  a  thing  from  the 
fact  of  its  being  unnecessary  is,  in  general,  not  legitimate.^  But  the 
contrary  fact  has  been  proved  by  Griesinger,  in  his  Introduction  to 
the  New  Testament,  p.  99,  and  by  Eichhorn,  in  his  Introduction  to 
the  New  Testament,  vol.  I.  p.  3,  who  state  the  causes  why  such  a 
written  record  was  necessary.  Again  ;  must  the  apostles  be  suppos- 
ed to  have  provided  only  for  cases  of  absolute  and  indispensable 
necessity  ?  May  there  not  have  been  many  christians,  who  were 
desirous  of  possessing  circumstantial  narratives  of  the  life  of  Jesus  ? 
The  opponents  of  Christianity,  even  in  the  apostolical  age,  may  have 
rendered  it  necessary,  on  many  accounts,  to  commit  to  paper  the 
history, and  doctrines  of  Jesus. 

Objection  3.  It  is  evident  from  the  whole  tenor  of  both  disserta- 
tions of  Eckermann,  that  the  principal  ground  on  which  he  builds 
his  hypothesis  of  the  spuriousnessof  the  historical  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  is  this  :  The  Gospels  are  not  written  in  the  spirit  of 
Jesus  and  his  immediate  disciples  ;  for  Jesus  and  his  disciples  would 
not,  by  any  means,  have  belief  in  their  doctrines  founded  on  signs 
and  miracles.  Now  as  there  are  passages  in  the  Gospels,  in  which 
signs  and  miracles  are  presented  as  proofs  of  the  divine  mission  of 
Jesus,  e.  g.  Matt.  11  :  20—24.  2—6.  Mark  16  :  11,  18.  Luke 
10  :  13,  etc.  John  2 :  1 1,  23.  6  :  26  ;  we  must  believe  that  all  such 
passages,  and  indeed,  whatever  is  either  itself  miraculous,  or  is  con- 
firmed solely  by  miracles,  are  the  additions  of  later  christians,  who 
altered  and  coiTupted  the  publications  of  Matthew,  Luke  and  John, 
about  the  end  of  the  first  century. 

Reply.  Without  recurring  to  either  the  internal  or  external 
proofs  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  the  principal  facts  in  the 
life  of  Jesus  (the  truth  of  which  Eckermann  admits)  would  them-: 
selves  lead  us  to  conclude,  a  priori,  not  only  that  Jesuo  himself  be- 
lieved in  the  extraordinary  agency  of  God,  but  that  he  would  refer 
his  readers  to  miracles  and  signs  as  proofs  of  his  divine  mission. 
Consult "  Philosophical  and  historico-exegetical  Remarks  on  the  Mira- 
cles," in  Flatt's  Magazine,  pt.  III.  •§>  35 — 38.  Moreover,  the  as- 
sumption that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  would  not  have  a  belief  in  the 


1  Staudlin's  Beit.  sup.  cit.  Flatt's  Mag.  p.  249. 

2  Staudlin's  Beitragc,  p.  157. 


52  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  i, 

doctrines  of  Jesus  to  be  founded  at  all  on  miracles,  is  false  :  nor  does 
a  single  one  of  the  passages  which  Eckermann  adduces,  afford  the 
least  ground  for  such  an  assertion.  Compare  the  dissertation  "  Did 
Jesus  declare  his  miracles  to  be  a  proof  of  the  divinity  of  his  mis- 
sion?"   inFlatt'sMag.  pt.  IV.  <§.3— 5. 

Again,  if  every  thing  miraculous  in  the  history  and  doctrines  of 
Jesus  contained  in  our  Gospels,  originated  with  superstitious  chris- 
tians, who  first  appeared  about  the  close  of  the  first  century  ;  how 
comes  it  that  our  Gospels  obtained  such  a  general  reception  through- 
out the  christian  church  ?  Or  if  it  was  a  universal  mania  for  miracles, 
which  produced  this  effect ;  how  comes  it  that  some  churches  at 
least  did  not  prefer  one  or  other  of  the  apocryphal  books,  in  which 
the  biography  of  Jesus  is  still  more  replete  with  miracles  ?  And  if 
the  much  older  fact,  that  Matthew,  Luke  and  John  left  certain  books 
behind  them,  was  known  till  after  the  middle  of  the  second  century  ; 
how  happens  it  that  the  far  more  recent  fact,  of  the  revision  and  en- 
largement of  them,  was  at  the  same  time  unknown  ?  And  why  was 
not  the  least  reference  made  to  it,  when  our  Gospels  were  univer- 
sally received  as  canonical  ?^ 

Objection  4.  If  Matthew  had  himself  written  the  Gospel  which 
bears  his  name,  he  would  certainly  have  given  us  more  of  those 
excellent  and  instructive  discourses  of  Jesus,  which  are  now  found 
only  in  Luke  and  John. 

Reply.  It  was  inconsistent  with  the  object  of  Matthew,  to  insert 
into  his  Gospel  those  things  which  he  omitted  and  which  are  found 
in  the  other  Gospels.  See  this  proved  in  the  work  "  On  the  Object 
of  the  evangelical  history  of  John,"  <^  62,  64,  and  in  St'audlin's 
Beitrage,  p.  166. 

For  a  literary  view  of  the  late  works  and  dissertations,  in  which 
the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel  of  John  has  been  either  disputed  or 
proved,  by  internal  and  external  evidence,  consult  Wegscheider's 
Complete  Introduction  to  the  Gospel  of  John,  Gottingen,  1806.  p  78, 
etc.  andEichhorn*s  Introduction  to  the  New  Test.  Vol.  II.  p.  239.  ed. 
1810.  The  latter  work  contains  likewise  a  refutation  of  the  latest  ob- 
jections, as  advanced  by  Cludius  in  his  "  Uransichten  des  Christen- 
thum's,"p.  50—89,  Altonae,  1808. 

The  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark  contain  clear  internal  evidence, 
from  which  the  positive  inference  may  be  made,  that  the  former  was 
written  by  Matthew,  and  the  latter  by  a  disciple  of  Peter.  The 
internal  mark  in  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  which  supports  the  opinion 
that  Matthew  is  the  author,  is  the  narrative  which  he  gives  of  his 
own  call  to  the  apostolic  office,  chapter  ix.  9 — 13.  This  subject  is 
discussed  in  the  work  "  On  the  Object  of  St.  John,"  p.  355  and  303. 


1  Vide  the  Dissertation  quoted,  in  Flatt's  Mag.  4.  p.  2.37—239.    '  luliJiii^i' 


<§>  2.]  INTERNAL  EVIDENCE.  53 

In  the  latter  passage,  it  is  remarked  that  the  insertion  of  a  circum- 
stantial account  of  the  reception  of  Matthew  into  the  number  of  the 
twelve,  and  of  other  circumstances  connected  with  it,  in  a  Gospel 
which  touches  so  seldom  on  the  earlier  history  of  the  other  Apostles, 
is  best  accounted  for  by  the  fact,  that  Matthew  himself  is  the  author 
of  this  Gospel. 

Several  internal  marks,  which  prove  that  the  author  of  the  Gos- 
pel of  Mark  was  a  disciple  of  the  apostle  Peter,  are  stated  in  Dis- 
sert. I.  in  Libror.  N.  T.  Historicorum  aliquot  loca,  (Opusc.  Acade- 
mica.  Vol.  III.  p.  10.)  and  in  the  works  there  mentioned.  Thus, 
notice  is  taken,  p.  60  etc.  of  the  fact,  that  Peter  is  distinguished  in 
the  16th  verse  of  Mark  III,  by  a  deviation  from  the  particular  con- 
struction of  the  sentence  which  was  commenced  in  v.  14,  and  after- 
wards continued  from  v.  17  to  19: — that  ahhough  his  name  is  not 
mentioned  out  of  its  proper  place,  still  he  is  not  mentioned  expressly 
as  the  first : — the  circumstance  that,  in  Mark  8  :  29,  merely  the  con- 
fession of  Peter  is  mentioned,  and  the  answer  of  Jesus  (Matt.  16 : 
17 — 19)  which  reflects  such  honour  on  Peter,  omitted  : — the  fact 
that  Mark,  in  imitation  of  Peter,  (Acts  1  :  21,)  begins  his  account 
with  the  baptism  of  John  : — and  p.  64,  note  107,  it  is  observed,  that 
Mark  only  (chap.  8  :  22 — 26)  gives  the  history  of  the  blind  man  of 
Bethsaida,  the  birth  place  of  Peter,  (John  1 :  45)  which  may  on 
that  account,  have  been  more  interesting  to  him.  Compare  Hug's 
Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  pt.  11.  <§>  27.  p.  380  etc.  where 
the  passages  Mark  1 :  36.  5  :  37.  13  :  3.  16  :  7,  are  considered  with 
reference  to  this  point. 

The  English  divine,  Dr.  Paley,  in  his  Horae  Paulinae,  published 
in  1790,  advances  a  new  and  pertinent  argument  for  the  genuineness 
of  the  thirteen  epistles  of  Paul,  and  for  the  credibility  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  founded  on  their  reciprocal  relations  and  references  to 
each  other,  which  were  evidently  the  effect,  not  of  premeditation  and 
design,  but  of  accidental  coincidence.^ 

Supplementary  note. —  On  the  origin  and  rccijjrocal  relation  of 
the  three  first  Gospels. 

The  principal  opinions  in  regard  to  the  relation  of  the  first  three 
Gospels,  which  have  of  late  been  advocated,  are  the  following: 

I.  That  the  three  evangelists  copied  one  from  another.  The 
opinion's  are,  that  either, 

Matthew  wrote  first ;  and  Mark,  when  composing  his  Gospel,  had 
Matthew's  before  him  ;  and  Luke  had  Matthew's  and  Mark's.  See 
Hug's  Introd.  to  N.  Test.  Vol.  II.  p.  349—420.  Or : 

Mark  formed  his  Gospel  wholly  from  the  two  others.  See  Gries- 
bach's  "  Commentio,  qua   Marci   evangelium   totum  e  Mattheai  et 


1  This  work  was  translated  into  German  by  Henke,  Helmstadt,  1797. j-^g 


54  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK  I. 

Lucae  Commentariis  decerptum  esse  monstratur."  P.  I,  II,  Janae, 
1789,90,  printed  in  Commentt.  Theolog.  Ed.  Velthusen,  Kuinol, 
Vol.  I.  Pauliis'  Commentaiy  on  the  first  three  Gospels,  and  In- 
troductionis  in  N.  T.  Capita  Selectiora,  Jenae,  1799.  No.  IV.  In 
the  latter  dissertation,  the  writer  supposes  that  Matthew  and  Luke 
in  the  composition  of  their  Gospels,  had  used  detached  and  scattered 
Greek  accounts  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  and  that  the  same  were  used  in 
part  by  both.     Or: 

Mark  wrote  his  Gospel  first ;  and  Matthew  and  Luke  made  use 
of  it.  This  opinion  is  stated  in  some  of  the  writings  above  referred 
to.  The  similarity  between  Luke  and  our  Greek  Matthew  is  ac- 
counted for  by  the  supposition,  that  the  Greek  translator  of  Matthew 
made  some  use  of  Luke.  See  "  On  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of 
John,"  p.  360.     Or  : 

Luke  wrote  first ;  and  Mark  availed  himself  of  Luke's  Gospel ; 
and  Matthew  of  both  the  others.  See  Vogel.  sup.  cit.  p.  34,  etc. 
II.  The  Evangelists  derived  their  Gospels  from  one  or  more 
common  sources,  Aramaean  or  Greek ;  such  as  an  original  Gospel, 
or  different  editions  and  translations  of  it.  Several  more  recent  modi- 
fications of  this  hypothesis,  (which  refer  to  the  number  or  nature  or 
language  of  these  sources,  and  to  the  use  made  of  them  by  the 
evangelists,)  are  found  in  the  following  works  ; 
In  Hanlein's  Introduction  to  N.  Test.  sup.  cit.  p.  270,  etc. 
In  Marsh's  Dissertation  on  the  origin  and  Composition  of  the  first 

three  Gospels,  p.  284,  etc.  of  Rosenmiiller's  translation.  ^ 
In  Eichhorn's  Introd.  to  N.  Test.  Vol.  I.  1804.     See  also  the  Re- 
views of  this  Introduction  in  the  "  Tiibinger  gelehrten  Anzeigen," 
for  1805,  Nos.  18—20;  p.  137—156.  and  in  the  "  Haller.  Lit. 
zeitung,"  for  1805,  No.  127,  etc.     See  also  Hug's  Introd.  part.  I. 
p.  64,  etc. 
In  Schmidt's  Introd.  to  N.  Test.  part.  I.  <§>  37 — 43.     Several  criti- 
cal remarks  on  the  views  which  have  been  entertained  of  the  re- 
lation of  our  Gospels,  are  contained  in  <§>  24 — 43. 
In  Gratz's  "  New  attempt  to  explain  the  origin  of  the  first  three 
Gospels,"  Tiibingen,  1812. 

III.  7.      The  testimony  of  the  earliest  heretics  to  the  genuineness 
of  the  homologoumena. 

The  genuineness  of  the  homologoumena  was  acknowledged,  even 
by  those  heretics  of  the  earliest  ages  to  whose  interest  the  authority 
of  these  books  was  extremely  prejudicial ;  for  they  sought  refuge  in 

1  And  in  the  original  English  work,  Bishop  Marsh's  Michaelis,  Vol.  III.  part. 
2.p.361,otc. 


<§,  2.]  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  HERETICS.  55 

arbitrary  interpretations  of  the  odious  passages  ;  and  did  not  pre- 
sume to  dispute  the  genuineness  of  the  books.  Among  the  Gnos- 
tics, for  instance,  there  were  some  sects  wlio  admitted  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  New  Testament,  but  distorted  their  meaning  by 
their  explanations,  and  maintained  the  necessity  of  giving  an  alle- 
gorical turn  to  all  the  declarations  of  the  apostles.  Irenaeus  says  : 
"  So  great  is  this  certainty  in  regard  to  our  Gospels,  that  even  the 
heretics  themselves  bear  testimony  in  their  favour;  and  all  ac- 
knowledging them,  each  endeavours  to  establish  from  them  his  own 
opinion."  ^  He  adds  :  "  But  all  others,  (except  the  aforementioned 
Marcionites,)  being  puffed  up  by  science  falsely  so  called,  do  indeed 
acknowledge  the  genuineness  of  the  Scriptures,  but  pervert  them  by 
their  interpretations. "'^^  They  moreover  accused  the  writers  of  the 
New  Testament  of  accommodation,  when  they  were  pressed  by  in- 
dividual passages.  "  These  lying  sophists  assert,  (says  Irenaeus,) 
that  the  apostles  hypocritically  dispensed  their  instruction  accord- 
ing to  the  capacity  of  their  audience,  accommodating  their  answers 
to  the  prejudices  of  the  inquirers  ;  teaching  the  illiterate  such  things 
as  would  gratify  their  ignorance,  fostering  the  indolence  of  the  lazy, 
and  cherishing  the  errors  of  the  deluded  ;  and  to  those  able  to  com- 
prehend the  ineffable  Father,  they  explained  the  deep  mysteries  of 
religion  by  parabolic  and  figurative  representations  :  so  that  our 
Lord  and  his  apostles  did  not  (according  to  their  views)  teach  truth 
as  it  is,  but  hypocritically  and  in  accommodation  to  the  dispositions 
of  men. "*^  And  in  chap.  12.  ^  6,  where  Irenaeus  utters  similar  sen- 
timents relative  to  this  Gnostic  theory  of  accommodation,  he  makes 
the  following  impressive  remark  :  "  Superfluous  and  in  vain  would 
the  advent  of  our  Lord  appear,  if  he  came  to  tolerate  and  cherish 
the  former  erroneous  opinions  of  men  respecting  God."^     The  Va- 

1  ''  Tanta  est  circa  Evangelia  haec  firmitas,  ut  et  ipsi  haeretici  testimonium 
reddant  eis,  et  ex  ipsis  egrediens  nnusquisque  eorum  conetur  suam  confirmare 
doctrinara."  Irenaeus,  Lib.  III.  c   11.  §7. 

2  Reliqui  vero  omnes,  fiilso  scientiae  nomine  inflati,  Scripturas  quidem  confi- 
tentur,  interpretationes  vero  convertunt,  Ibid.  c.  12.  §  12. — Compare  Schmidt's 
observations  upon  the  Commentary  of  the  Gnostic  Heracleon  on  the  Gospel  of 
John  ;  in  his  Introd.  to  N.  T.  part  I.  p.  238. 

3  Dicunt  hi,  qui  vanissimi  sunt  Sophistae,  quod  apostoli  cum  hypocrisi  fece- 
runt  doctrinam  secundum  audientium  capacitatem,  et  responsiones  secundum 
interrogantium  suspiciones,  coecis  coeca  confabulantes  secundum  coecitatem 
ipsorum  ;  languentibus  autem  secundum  lauguorem  ipsorum,  et  errantibus  se- 
cundum errorem  eorum  ; — his  vero,  qui  innominabilem  Patrem  capiunt,  per 
parabolas  et  aenigmata  inenarrabile  fecisse  mysterium  :  itaque  non,  quemadmo- 
dum  ipsa  habet  Veritas,  sed  in  hypocrisi,  et  quemadomoduni  capiebat  unusquis- 
que,  Dominum  et  Apostolos  edidisse  magisterium."  Iren.  L.  III.  c.  5.  §  1. 

4  "  Superfluus  autem  et  inutilis  adventus  Domini  apparebit,  si  quidem  venit 
permissurus  et  servaturus  uniuscujusque  olim  insitam  dc  Deo  opinionem. — See 
also  Carus  :  Historia  antiquior  Sententiarum  Ecclesiae  Graecae  de  Accommoda- 
tione  Christo  imprimis  et  Apostolis  tributa,"  Lipsiae,  1793,  §  16. 


56  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK  I. 

lentinians,  one  of  the  Gnostic  sects,  were  particularly  attached  to  the 
Gospel  of  John.^  But  it  appears  they  had  also  our  other  Gospels, 
and  particularly  that  of  Luke,  or  at  least  an  abridged  and  perhaps  an 
adulterated  copy ;  as  we  learn  from  Origen  and  Irenaeus.  The 
latter  (after  having  adduced  several  parts  of  the  history  and  doc- 
trines of  Jesus,  which  are  contained  only  in  Luke,)  says :  "  And 
many  other  things  which  are  found  in  Luke  alone,  are  made  use  of 
by  both  Marcion  and  Valentinus  :"2 — "  and  consequently,  they  must 
either  adopt  the  other  contents  of  Luke,  or  reject  these  also."^  And 
Origen,  in  reply  to  the  objection  of  his  opponent,  *'  that  some  of  the 
christians  altered  the  Gospel  in  three  or  four  different  ways,  in  order 
to  evade  objections  ;"  makes  these  remarks :  "  I  know  of  none  who 
adulterated  the  Gospel  except  the  followers  of  Marcion  and  of  Val- 
entinus, and  as  I  suppose  those  of  Lucian."^  It  likewise  appears, 
that  to  the  original  number  of  the  gospels,  they  added  another, 
termed  "the  Gospel  of  truth  :"  for,  otherwise  they  could  not  have 
boasted  of  having  more  Gospels  than  the  catholic  church  ;  as  Ire- 
naeus informs  us  they  did  :  "  The  followers  of  Valentinus  produce 
their  own  writings ;  and  boast  of  the  possession  of  wore  Gospels 
than  really  exist.  Nay  to  such  a  pitch  has  their  audacity  risen,  that 
to  a  production  of  their  own,  which  has  no  resemblance  to  the  apos- 
tolical Gospels,  they  have  given  the  name  of  The  Gospel  of  truth."^ 
And  it  seems  that  Valentinus,  like  Marcion,  received  the  writings  of 
Paul ;  from  which  the  Gnostics  are  said  to  have  taken  proofs  in  sup- 
port of  their  system.^  For  Irenaeus  distinguishes  Valentinus  and 
Marcion,  from  another  sect  who  rejected  the  writings  of  the  apostle 

1  Irenaeus  says  :  "  Hi  autem  qui  a  Valentino  sunt,  eo,  quod  est  secundum 
Johannem,  (evangelic)  plenissime  utentes,  etc.  L,  III.  c.  7.  §  11.  In  the  work 
"  On  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,"  p.  52,  it  is  remarked,  that  the  Valen- 
tinians  probably  derived  many  forms  of  expression  from  the  Gospel  of  John, 
v^hich  were  unknown  to  the  elder  Gnostics. 

2  Et  alia  multa  sunt,  quae  inveniri  possunt  a  solo  Luca  dicta  esse.quibus  et 
Marcion  et  Valentinus  ultuntur.  Lib.  III.  c.  14.  §  3. 

3  "  Necesse  est  igitur,  et  reliqua  quae  ab  eo  (Luca)  dicta  sunt,  recipero  eos, 
aut  et  his  renuntiare.  ibid  §  4.  And  at  the  end  of  this  section,  after  having  again 
spoken  of  the  Valentinians  and  the  Marcionites  and  especially  of  the  former,  he 
adds  :  bi  autem  nt  reliqua  suscipere  cogentur,  intendentes  perfecto  evangelio  et 
apostolorum  doctrinse,  opportet  eos  poenitentiam  agere. 

*  MsTaxa^a^avtag  ds  to  slayyiXLOv  akkovg  ovx  oJda,  jj  jovgano  Maoxicovog, 

TlT^l  "''*'  ^"^'^^'"^'''^^^  o^i"«*  ^«  ^ocl  Tovg  in6  Aovx^vov,  Contra  Celsum  L. 

a1nrJ^ifn7n.rJ.^-^f^-^"^'"''  suut  suas   conscriptioues  proferentes,  plura  habere 
clr^ZZZTl      'P''  «^^»g«l'a.     Si  quidem  in  tantum  processerunt  audau- 


!^  2.]  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  HERETICS.  57 

Paul.^  Tertullian  says,^  that  Valentinus  appears  to  have  used  the 
whole  collection  of  New  Testament  books ;  and  to  have  spared 
those  which  Marcion  had  lacerated.  His  only  complaint  is,  that 
Valentinus  perverted  their  meaning.^ 


III.  8.  The  genuineness  of  the  homologoumena  acknowledged  by 
the  earlier  heretics. 

The  earlier  heretics  made  alterations  and  erasions  in  the  homo- 
logoumena ;  but  acknowledged  the  genuineness  of  these  books. — 
This  is  exemplified  in  the  case  of  Marcion,  a  very  ancient  witness, 
who  decidedly  maintained  that  ten  of  Paul's  epistles  were  genuine ; 
but  asserted  that  alterations  and  interpolations  had  been  made  in 
them,  by  some  christians  who  were  inclined  towards  Judaism.  Ac- 
cordingly, he  undertook  the  task  of  restoring  them  to  their  primitive 
form  ;  and  actually  published  what  he  regarded  as  an  improved 
edition  of  them.  He  believed  the  Gospel  of  Luke  to  have  been 
written,  not  by  Luke,  but  by  the  apostle  Paul :  and  this  too  he 
undertook  to  improve.  Now  the  very  fact,  that  Marcion  regarded 
the  Gospel  of  Luke,  which  he  used,  as  a  production  of  Paul ;  evin- 
ces the  existence  of  an  earlier  opinion,  that  Luke  was  the  author  of 
this  Gospel.  And  this  opinion  it  was,  in  connexion  with  the  passage, 
Coloss.  4 :  14,  where  Paul  mentions  the  salutation  of  "  Luke  the 
beloved  physician,"  together  with  other  similar  statements,  which 
gave  rise  to  the  thought  that  the  Gospel  of  Luke  was  alluded  to  by 
Paul,  when  he  speaks  of  his  Gospel,  Gal.  2:  5,  7,  14,  and  in  other 
passages.  The  unfounded  opinion,  that  Paul  participated  in  the 
composition  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  arose'*  from  a  misapprehension 
of  the  meaning  of  evayy^'hov  in  the  words  of  Paul,  (Rom.  2:  16. 
and  16:  25.)  xard  to  ivayyiliov  inov,  i.  e.  according  to  my  Gospel ; 
for  it  was  customary,  early,  to  appropriate  the  word  tvayyihop  to 
biographies  of  Christ.  Hence  it  was  inferred,  that  Paul  must  have 
left  a  biography  of  Christ ;  and  as  there  was  none  extant  under  his 
name,  and  as  it  was  evident  from  the  Acts  of  the  apostles,  (16:  20 
etc.)  and  from  the  epistles  of  Paul,  (Col.  4:  14.  2  Tim.  4:  11.) 
that  Luke  was  his  confidant ;  the  Gospel  of  Luke  was  therefore 
termed  Paul's  Gospel.  Accordingly,  Eusebius  remarks  :  "  It  is 
said,  that  Paul  referred  to  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  when  he  used  the 
expression,  *  according  to  my  Gospel,'  as  if  he  were  writing  con- 

1  Advers.  Haeres.  L.  TIL  c.  14.   §  3,  4.  and  c.  15.  §  I.  Eadera  autem  diciraus 
iterum  el  his,  qui  Paulutn  apostolum  non  cognoscunt  &c. 

2  De  praescriptionihus,  c.  38. 

3  See  Hug's  Introduction,  pt.  I.  p.  57,  etc.  Andover  ed, 

4  See  "  On  Uie  object  of  John,"  §  54,  56. 

8 


58  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [BS,    K 


cerning  a  Gospel  of  his  own.'^^  In  addition  to  this,  it  was  a  custom- 
ary saying,  that  Mark's  Gospel  sprung  from  the  sermons  of  Peter, 
and  Luke's  Gospel  from  those  of  PauL^  Thus  Irenaeus  says : 
"  Mark  himself,  who  vvas  the  scholar  and  interpreter  of  Peter,  trans- 
mitted to  us  in  writing  what  Peter  announced.  And  Luke,  the 
follower  of  Paul,  recorded  the  Gospel  which  Paul  preached."^ — 
Such  observations  would  not  have  become  current,  had  it  not  bee» 
well  known  that  Gospels  were  extant  bearing  the  names  of  Mark 
and  Luke* 

III.  9.  Testimony  of  the  heretics.  They  acknowledged  the 
genuineness  of  the  homologoumena,  while  they  denied  the  au- 
thority of  their  authors. 

The  Ebionites  rejected  the  epistles  of  Paul,  not  because  they 
denied  Paul  to  be  the  author  of  them,  but  because  they  regarded 
Paul  himself  as  an  apostate  from  the  Mosaic  law  :  "  Ebionei  (says 
Irenaeus'*)  Apostolum  Paulum  recusant,  apostatam  eum  legis  dicen- 
tes.'*  It  was  doubtless  for  the  same  reason,  that  they  rejected  the 
Gospel  of  Luke  ;  because  it  was  the  production  of  a  companion  of 
the  apostle  Paul,  and  was  commonly  ascribed  to  Paul  himself.  See 
the  preceding  Illustration,  The  meaning,  in  the  passage  of  Irenaeus 
which  treats  of  the  Ebionites/  is  not:  "Those  who  reject  the 
apostle  Paul,  (the  Ebionites,)  receive  that  portion  of  the  Gospel 
history  and  doctrine,  which  is  found  in  Luke  alone  ;  and  therefore 
they  are  bound  to  admit  what  Luke  testifies  of  Paul  in  the  Acts  of 
the  apostles  ;"but  the  meaning  of  Irenaeus  was  this  :  "  The  Ebion- 
ites who  reject  Luke,  thereby  rob  themselves  of  many  indispensably 
necessary  parts  of  the  history  of  Christ,  which  are  found  only  in 
Luke ;  they  therefore  do  not  possess  a  complete  Gospel  history.'^ 
He  reasons  thus  :  "  If  they  reject  the  authority  of  the  apostle  Paul, 
then  they  must  discard  I^ke,  who  in  his  Acts  of  the  apostles,  gives 
an  account  of  the  election  of  Paul  to  the  apostleship  ;  but  if  they 
discard  Luke,  they  deprive  themselves  of  those  important  parts  of 

1  ^aol  ce  ojs  Sqa  xov  :tard  Aovaav  tvayyeXi'ov  fiW/fiovvsiv  6  IlavXog  siujd'ev, 
oitTjviaa  ojg neQi  Idt'ov  rtvds  iiayyaUov  yoacpojv  Ihyy  xatdro  tlayyihov  fiov. 
Hist.  Eccl.  III.  4. 

5  Compare  Schmidt's  Introd.  pt.  I.  p.  50. 

3  Marcus  d"^scipulus  et  interpres  Petri,  et  ipse  quae  a  Petro  ar>nuntiata  erant 
per  scripta  {tyy^aqms)  nobis  tradidit.  Et  Lucas  sectator  Paali,  quod  ab  illo 
praedicabaturevangetium  in  libro  condrdit.  Adv.  Haereses,  L.  III.  c.  I.  §  1. 

4  Lib.  I.  c.  26.  §  2. 

5  Eadem  aulem  dicimus  itertim  et  bis,  qui  Paulum  apostolum  non  cognoscant, 
quoniam  (quod)  autreliquis  verbis  Evangelii,  quae  per  solum  Lucam  in  nostram 
Yenerunt  agnitionem,  renuntiare  debent,  et  non  uti  eis ;  aut  si  ilia  recipiunt 
©mnia,  habent  necessitatem,  recipere  etiara  earn  testificationem,  quae  est  de 
Paulo.  III.  15.  §  1.  '  Jr  ,H 


§  ^.]  TESTIMONY  OF  MARCION.  59 

the  Gospel  history,  which  are  contained  in  Luke  alone. ^  And  as 
they  cannot  acknowledge  the  apostolic  authority  of  Paul,  because 
they  reject  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  they  are  guilty  of  despising  a 
choice  made  by  Christ  himself,  which  rests  on  the  testimony  of 
Luke.  But  that  Luke's  narrative  is  not  true,  is  what  they  are 
unable  to  prove  :  for  by  the  very  fact,  that  God  committed  to  Luke 
alone,  the  charge  of  recording  (in  his  Gospel)  a  large  and  essential 
part  of  the  history  of  Jesus,  he  confers  credibility  on  his  narrative 
of  the  history  and  doctrines  of  the  apostles." — Although  the  Gos- 
pel of  Luke  was  held  in  no  estimation  by  the  Ebionites,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  person  of  its  author,  and  although  they  used  exclu- 
sively the  Gospel  of  Matthew  ;^  still  it  will  not  follow,  that  the  rea- 
son why  they  esteemed  the  Gospels  of  Mark  and  John  so  little,  was 
either  because  they  entertained  no  personal  respect  for  these  men, 
(for  it  is  admitted  that  Peter,  the  tutor  of  Mark,  and  John,  were 
held  in  the  most  respectful  estimation  by  the  Jewish  christians  ;)  or 
because  they  denied  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels  which  were 
attributed  to  John  and  to  the  pupil  of  Peter.  Perhaps  the  Gospel 
of  John  was  not  admitted  into  the  canon  of  the  Ebionites,  because 
it  was  published  at  a  very  late  period,  and  thus  was  unknown  to 
this  sect  of  Jewish  christians,  till  the  time  when  they  were  preju- 
diced against  all  productions  which  came  from  the  gentile  Christians. 
The  Gospel  of  Matthew  was  preferred  to  the  earlier  one  of  Mark, 
in  consequence  of  its  being  written  in  the  vernacular  tongue  of 
Palestine,  the  seat  of  the  Ebionites. 

Marcion,  on  the  other  hand,  who  admitted  the  authority  of  the 
apostle  Paul  alone,  rejected  the  Gospels  of  Matthew,  of  Mark  (or 
Peter)  and  of  John  ;  not  however  because  he  denied  their  genuine- 
ness ;  but  because  he  denied  their  authors  to  possess  any  authority, 
they  being  apostles  of  the  circumcision,  whom  Paul  himself  had  re- 
buked. See  Illustration  8th,  note.  In  like  manner,  it  must  be  sup- 
posed that  the  reason  why  Marcion  rejected  the  Acts  of  the  apos-  • 
ties,  was  not  that  he  denied  Luke  to  be  its  author ;  but  because  the^- 
Acts  of  the  apostles  was  not  ascribed  to  Paul,  as  the  Gospel  of 
Luke  was ;  (See  Illust.  8th);  and  because  the  book  of  Acts  speaks 
favourably  of  the  apostles  of  the  circumcision,  to  whom  Marcion 
was  opposed.  And  this  will  remove  the  objection,  which  has  been 
urged  against  the  opinion  that  Marcion's  Gospel  was  an  adulterated 
copy  of  Luke's  Gospel,  viz.  that  if  it  were  so,  then  Marcion  would 


1  And  that  this  was  really  the  case,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  those,  who 
according:  to  L.  I.  c.  26.  §  3.  rejected  the  apostle  Paul,  used  no  other  Gospel  than'' 
that  of  Matthew. 

9  Irenaeus,  Lib.  I.  c.  26.  §  2.  III.  c.  11.  §  7. 


60  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

doubtless  have  received  the  other  production  of  the  same  Luke,  the 
Acts  of  the  apostles.^ 

In  order  to  account  for  Marcion's  rejecting  the  epistles  to  Tniio- 
thy  and  Titus  from  his  collection  of  Paul's  epistles,  it  is  not  neces- 
sory  to  suppose,  that  he  doubted  their  genuineness.  "  Perhaps  the 
reason  for  their  omission^  was,  that  they  seem  to  have  been  intended 
rather  for  ministers  than  for  churches  at  large,  and  Marcion  intended 
in  his  canon  to  specify  only  those  books  which  were  to  be  read 
publicly."  Loffler  and  others  suppose,  that  these  epistles  had  not 
yet  come  to  his  knowledge.  Compare  what  is  said  in  Arneth's 
work,  p.  44,  in  favour  of  the  supposition,  that  Marcion  was  ac- 
quainted with  more  of  the  New  Testament  writings  than  are  con- 
tained in  his  canon. 

III.  ]  0.   The  nature  of  the  objections  of  later  heretics,  proves  the 
genuineness  of  the  homologoumena. 

[And  when  in  the  course  of  time,  those  heretics  began  to  dispute 
even  the  genuineness  of  these  writings,  they  did  not  urge  the  want 
of  ancient  testimony  in  their  favour,  or  attempt  to  impugn  their 
genuineness  with  any  historical  objections ;  but  they  were  contented 
to  adduce  some  trifling,  pretended,  doctrinal  objections,  extorted 
from  the  books  themselves.] 

Such  were  the  objections  of  the  Alogians,^  against  the  Gospel  of 
John.  They''  denied  the  continuance  of  the  extraordinary  gifts  of 
the  spirit  in  the  church,  in  opposition  to  the  Montanists  ;  but  they 
could  not  defend  themselves  against  their  opponents,  without  abso- 
lutely rejecting  the  Gospel  of  John,  which  contained  the  promise  of 
of  the  Paraclete.  Their  solicitude  to  disprove  the  extraordinary 
gifts  of  the  Spirit,  preponderated  over  every  historical  argument 
which  could  be  adduced.  Irenaeus  remarks  :  "  But  others  do  not 
admit  the  representation  given  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  in  which  the 
Lord  promised  that  he  would  send  the  Paraclete  (Comforter) ;  but 

1  Schmidt's  Handbuch  derchristlichen  Kirchengesch.  parti,  p.  264. 

8  "Tlie  Object  of  John,"  p.  257. 

8  [It  was  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Lardner,  that  no  heretics  ever  existed,  who  reject- 
ed the  Gospel  and  first  epistle  of  John,  and  yet  received  the  other  Gospels  and 
the  other  books  of  the  New  Testament,  as  these  Alogians  are  supposed  to  have 
done.— They  were  so  called  probably,  because  they  "rejected  God  the  Logos," 
as  Epiphanius  informs  us,  (p.  396,  397) ;  the  name  d-Xoyoi  being  expressive  of 
their  sentiments.  Dr.  Lardner  therefore  maintained,  that "  as  no  notice  is  taken  • 
of  them  in  Irenaeus,  Eusebius  or  any  other  ancient  writer  before  Philaster  and 
Epiphanius,"  this  heresy  was  probably  invented  upon  the  occasion  of  the  contro- 
versy with  the  Millenarians.  See  also  Dr.  Semler's  Historische  Einleituna  etc. 
2.  Abschn.  1  Abth.  3.  Hauptst.  §  38.  Anmerk  204.     S.] 

*  "The  Object  of  John,"  §  24-27. 


^5>  3.]  TESTIMONY  OF  ORIGEN.  61 

reject  both  this  prophetic  spirit  and  the  Gospel  itself;  in  order  that 
they  may  oppose  the  gift  of  the  spirit,  which  according  to  the  de- 
cree of  the  Father,  was  poured  out  upon  the  human  family  in  these 
late  days."^  It  was  only  the  later  Alogians,  who  without  hesitation 
ascribed  the  Gospel  of  John  and  the  Apocalypse  to  Cerinthus. 

Such  also  were  the  doubts  of  some  unknown  persons  mentioned 
by  Origen,  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  second  epistle  to  Timothy. 
The  remark  of  Origen  ^  is  this  :  "  Some  have  ventured  to  reject  the 
second  epistle  to  Timothy,  on  account  of  the  passage  2  Tim.  3:  8. 
Clwavvrig  xat  *Iafji§Qriq  avziazriaav  jtfmuafi.^)  quasi  habentem  in  se 
textum  alicujus  secreti  :^  but  they  were  not  able  to  substantiate  their 
opinion." 

Similar  were  the  objections  of  Faustus,  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
Gospels  and  the  writings  of  Paul.  The  principal  arguments  of  this 
Manichaean  against  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  were  their 
inconsistency  with  many  parts  of  his  system,  and  other  trifling  inter- 
nal considerations.'* 

On  the  collective  evidence  of  the  orthodox  and  heretics  for  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  see  Hanlein's  Introduction  to  the 
New  Test.  (pt.  I.  p.  72 — 108.)  Kleuker  on  the  genuineness  and 
credibility  of  the  manuscript  records  of  Christianity,  (pt.  III.  Vol. 
I.  p.  349 — 468.)  Hug  has  collected,  from  the  fragments  of  the 
heretics  of  the  2d  century,  testimonies  in  favour  of  all  the  homolo- 
goumena  of  the  New  Testament,  except  the  epistle  to  Titus. 
(See  his  Introd.  pt.  I.  p.  31 — 64.  Andover  ed.) 


SECTION    III. 

Genuineness  of  the  antilegomena,  or  disputed  books, 

Origen(l)  and  Eusebius(2)  both  acknowledge,    that  the   Apoca- 
lypse was  unanimously  received  as  genuine,  by  the  earliest  writers ; 

Alii  vero,  ut  donum  spiritus  frustrentur,  quod  in  novissitnis  temporibus  se- 
cundum placitum  patris  effusum  est  in  humanum  genus,  illam  speciem  non  ad- 
mittunt,  quae  est  secundum  Joannis  Evangelium,  in  qua  Paracletum  se  mls- 
urum  Dominus  promisit.  sed  simul  et  Evangelium  et  propheticum  repellunt  spir- 
itara."  Irenaeus  adv.  Haeres.  III.  11.  9. 

2  Opera  T.  XII.  edit.  Wurtzb.  p.  249. 

8  i.  e.  some  have  rejected  2  Tim.  3:  8,  (Janncs  and  Jambres  opposed  Moses,) 
as 'if  this  passage  contained  something  mysterious.     S. 

•»  See  Michaelis  Introd.  N.  T.  §  2.  and  "  On  the  Object  of  JoImi,"  p.  222.       * 


62  ^  GENUINENESS  OP  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

yet  the  former  was  a  strenuous  opposer  of  the  Chiliasts,  and  the 
latter  not  an  unprejudiced  witness. (3)  With  this  acknowledg- 
ment, the  testimony  of  the  earliest  writings  which  have  reached  us, 
perfectly  accords. (4)  And  even  the  open  assailants  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, do  not  venture  to  deny,  that  in  the  first  ages  of  Christianity, 
it  was  acknowledged  to  be  a  production  of  the  apostle  John. (5) 
The  Apocalypse  might  therefore  have  been  received  into  the  num- 
ber of  the  homologoumena. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  unanimously  ascribed  to  the 
apostle  Paul,  by  the  writers  of  the  Greek  church  ;  it  was  only  the 
Latin  church,  led  by  an  error  that  can  be  accounted  for,  which  re- 
ceded from  the  original  and  more  correct  opinion  relative  to  the 
author  of  this  epistle. (6) 

Finally,  we  have  also  conclusive  evidence  in  favour  of  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  other  disputed  books,  namely,  the  second  and  third 
epistles  of  Johuj  the  second  epistle  of  Peter,  the  epistle  of  James 
and  tbatof  Jude.(7) 

III.   1.   Testimony  of  Origen  for  the  genuineness  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse. 

The  following  evidence,  derived  from  Origen,  is  discussed  in  the 
"  New  Apology  for  the  Revelation,"  <§>  6,  and  in  the  work  "  On 
the  Object  of  John,"  »§.  32. 

According  to  Eusebius,^  Origen  has  these  remarks,  in  the  fifth 
section  of  his  Explanation  of  the  Gospel  of  John:  "But  what  shall 
be  said  of  John,  who  reclined  upon  the  breast  of  Jesus  ?  He  left  a 
single  Gospel ;  acknowledging  at  the  same  time,  that  he  could  have 
written  so  many  that  the  world  could  not  contain  them.  He  also 
wrote  the  Apocalypse  ;  in  which  he  was  commanded  to  be  silent 
and  not  to  record  the  voices  of  the  seven  thunders.  He  has  also 
left  an  epistle  of  but  few  lines  ;  perhaps  also  a  second  and  a  third, 
but  these  are  not  universally  acknowledged  to  be  genuine."'^ 

1  Eccles.  Hist.  VI.  25. 

^  Tl  del  TTEQt  tov  avanscTovTog  Xiysiv  inl  to  or^J^og  rov  'Jfjuov,  ^loaavvov ; 
Of  svayyiXiov  sv  xaTaXiXomEV,  ojnoXo/wv,  8vva(T&ai  rocravra  noiriasLy,  a  ovde 
6  xoafxog  xagijactL  idvvaro'  eygaips  de  xal  ■ii]v  "An  onaXv  xjjiv,  xc- 
Xtva&Hg  atconriaat  xal  fzij  yQaipat  xa?  tmv  sma,  Sjoovjwv  (ptovdg.  KaraXi- 
Xotns  ds  xal  iniaxoXiiV  navv  oXtywv  orux<av'  lo-iw  de  xal  deviigav  xal  xgltijv 
imtl  ov  navreg  (paal  yvfjaiovg  elvav  taviag. 


^3.]  TESTIMONY  OF  ORIGEN.  63 

Semler  and  Merkel,  (see  the  work,  "  Proof  that  the  Apocalypse 
is  a  spurious  book,")  have  attempted  to  invahdate  the  force  of  this 
very  distinct  testimony  of  Origen,  in  the  following  manner : 

First,  by  the  supposition,  that  Origen  here  may,  perhaps,  not 
have  spoken  from  personal  conviction ;  but  have  permitted  himself 
to  use  a  mendacium  theologicum  (theological  falsehood,)  for  good 
reasons,  accommodating  himself  to  the  opinion  of  the  churches  in 
Palestine,  Arabia,  Phoenicia  and  other  places. — But  in  reply  to  this 
it  may  be  observed,  that  there  is  no  historical  proof  that  Origen  was 
under  any  necessity  of  accommodating  himself  to  the  opinion  of 
certain  oriental  churches  ;  or  that  he  would  have  suffered  himself 
to  do  so.  Origen  himself  often  makes  use  of  the  Apocalypse,  and 
without  any  urgent  reason  :  and  the  testimony  above  mentioned,  is 
not  found  in  a  homily  addressed  to  the  populace  ;  but  in  an  exe- 
getical  work  on  the  Gospel  of  John.  If  Origen's  private  opinion, 
as  to  the  origin  of  the  Apocalypse,  had  differed  from  this  ;  his  dis- 
ciple Dionysius,  who  did  not  acknowledge  John  to  be  its  author, 
would  have  produced  the  opinion  of  his  illustrious  tutor  in  support 
of  his  own,  rather  than  have  rested  on  other  trivial  grounds.  Fi- 
nally ;  had  Origen  possessed  any  different  information,  relative  to 
the  author  of  the  Apocalypse,  no  reason  can  be  assigned  why 
he  should  have  hesitated  to  produce  it.  In  the  context  of  this  very 
passage,  he  mentions  that  the  second  and  third  epistles  of  John  were 
not  universally  received  as  genuine  ;  and  immediately  after  this 
passage,  he  makes  the  following  remark  on  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
brews :  i  "  Those  churches,  which  receive  this  epistle  as  a  produc- 
tion of  Paul,  do  well ;  for  it  was  not  without  reason  that  this  opin- 
ion was  entertained  by  the  ancients  ;  the  contents  belong  to  Paul 
but  the  style  is  not  his :  who  the  writer  was,  God  only  knows." 
Why  might  he  not  have  passed  a  similar  judgment  on  the  Apoca- 
lypse, if  he  had  any  reason  to  doubt  its  genuineness  ? 

Secondly,  Merkel  urges  this  supposition  :  "  Perhaps  Origen  would 
have  expressed  a  different  opinion,  concerning  the  author  of  this 
book,  if  he  had  written  an  exposition  of  it,  or  if  he  had  given  his 
opinion  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life." — But  we  know  that,  precisely 
at  that  time,  he  still  regarded  the  Apocalypse  as  a  prophetical  book 
of  John :  as  we  learn  from  his  reply  to  Celsus,  L.  VI.  «§>  6.  23, 
whicih  Eusebius  informs  us,  Origen  wrote  in  his  old  age.^ 

Thirdly,  Merkel  makes  this  additional  objection  :  "  Origen  gen- 
erally, makes  little  discrimination  between  genuine  and  supposititious 
works,  and  was  very  negligent  in  examining  the  historical  evidence 
of  the  genuineness  of  any  book." — But  Origen  on  the  contrary, 
while  treating  of  the  antilegomena,  does  very  frequently,  and  some- 

1  Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.  VI.  25.  2  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  VI.  36. 


64  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

times  without  any  particular  necessity,  remark  that  they  were  not 
universally  admitted  to  be  genuine  ;  as  may  be  seen  <5>  2.  III.  1.  6. 
of  this  work,  and  in  Siiskind's  Magazine  for  Christian  Dogmatics.^ 
This  is  therefore  an  unjust  accusation,  that  he  is  negligent  or  care- 
less in  examining  the  genuineness  ofbooks.^ 

III.  2.     The  Testimony  of  Eusebius  for  the  genuineness  of  the 

Apocalypse, 

The  principal  passages  in  Eusebius'  Ecclesiastical  History,  in 
which  he  speaks  of  the  Revelation  of  Saint  John,  are  the  three 
following : 

I.  "  As  to  the  Apocalypse,  the  greater  part  are  fluctuating  in 
their  opinions ;  but  from  the  testimony  of  the  ancients,  to  be  ad- 
duced in  due  season,  it  shall  be  made  evident,  what  judgment  we 
are  to  form  of  it."^ 

II.  "  The  Apocalypse  of  John  may,  if  it  be  thought  proper,  be 
classed  with  the  homologoumena.  The  opinions  concerning  it, 
shall  be  stated  at  a  proper  time."  And  after  a  few  lines,  he  says : 
"We  may  also,  as  I  remarked,  if  it  is  thought  proper,  class  the 
Apocalypse  of  John  among  the  disputed  books ;  which  some,  as  I 
have  stated,  reject,  and  others  class  with  the  homologoumena.'"* 

III.  Eusebius  quotes  a  passage  from  Papias,  in  which  the  latter 
•says:  "He  had  always  made  very  careful  inquiry  concerning  the 
oral  declarations  of  the  ancients,  (loyovg  xtav  ngso^vTtgMv,)  what 
Andrew  or  Peter,  Philip,  Thomas,  James  or  John  or  Matthew  or 
any  other  disciple  of  Jesus  had  said  ;  what  Aristion  and  John  the 
Elder,  (o  Kgen^uiegog  * Jwavvrig,)  the  disciples  of  the  Lord,  say." 
Here  Eusebius  considers  it  remarkable,  that  Papias  should  mention 
the  name  of  John  twice,  and  once  in  connexion  with  such  as  were 
not  apostles  ;  and  that  he  distinguishes  the  latter  John  by  the  word 
nge&pvTigog.  He  adds,  that  this  confirms  the  opinion  of  two  per- 
sons of  tthat  name  having  lived  in  Asia ;  and  then  remarks,  that 
there  were  still  known  in  Ephesus  two  graves,  each  of  which  was 
termed  the  grave  of  John ;  and  concludes  with  these  words ; 
"  These  things  deserve  attention  ;  for  it  is  probable,  that  it  was 

1  No.  9.  p.  17—26. 

2  See  Eichhorn's  Introd.  to  N.  Test.  Vol.  2.  second  part,  p.  400  etc. 

^  Tifiq  8s  "^ AitoxaXvipea  ecp  smte^ov  m  vw  naga  jotg  noXXolg  nsQielKsrai 
f  do^a'  ofiug  ye  firjv  ix  rijg  twv  agxaiav  fiaqtvqiag  iv  otxc/w  xcclqco  t»jv  inl- 
xgiffiv  digital  x«t  avri^.      H.  E.  III.  24. 

*  JEnl  tovToig  {ofiokoyovfuvotg)  zaxtiov,  si'ys  cpaveif]^  rriv^ A7iomXvif>iv^ laav- 
vmr  nsgl  i}g  ju  do^avTa  ttata  naigov  ix^rjaofxe&a. — IVi  rs  {iv  toXg  vo&oig  xa- 
rnax^b),)  tag  eiprjv,  ^  ' Imuvvov  ^AjionuXv^iig,  tl  cpavslt],  tjv  tivegj  w$  I'yijy, 
a&eiovaiVj  kiagM  5i  iynqlvovin,  jolg  ofioXoyovfuvoig.     H.  E.  III.  25. 


^3.]  ,     ♦testimony  OF  EUSEBlUt>^' ^  »<.'<  > 


the  second  John  to  whom  the  Revelation  was  made,  If  we  will  not 
rather  admit  that  it  w^as  the  first."^ 

These  passages  afford  the  following  result  :  Eusebius  found, 
among  ancient  writers,  none  who  disputed  the  genuineness  of  the 
Revelation ;  for  if  he  had,  how  could  he  have  said  :  "  The  Apoc- 
alypse may  be  classed  with  the  hornologoumena,  if  it  is  thought 
proper."  Indeed,  he  appears  in  another  passage  to  have  tacitly 
classed  it  among  the  undisputed  books  ;  for  he  says  ^  that  Clemens 
of  Alexandria,  in  his  Hypotyposibus,  made  extracts  from  all  the 
books  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  (jiaat;?  TTJg  hdta{)7]nov  ygcxq-fjg^,  not 
excepting  the  disputed  books,  [Tag  uvxiUyo^ivag),  the  epistle  of  Jude 
and  the  other  catholic  epistles,  the  epistle  of  Barnabas  and  the  Rev- 
elation of  Peter.  He  then,  immediately  afterwards,  speaks  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Now  as  Eusebius  does  not  mention  the 
Apocalypse,  among  the  antilegomena ;  and  as  Clemens  of  Alexan- 
dria, who  quotes*^  the  Apocalypse,  and  therefore  must  have  been 
acquainted  with  it,  probably  did  not  exclude  it  in  his  Hypotyposibus  ; 
we  are  warranted  in  saying,  that  Eusebius  has  here  tacitly  assigned 
it  a  place  among  the  homologoumena.  Nor  does  he,  in  the  course 
of  his  whole  ecclesiastical  history,  mention  any  ancient  different 
opinion,  excepting  that  of  Caius  and  some  others  who  ascribed  it  to 
Cerinthus.  The  nvig  [some]  therefore,  w^hose  objection  to  its  gen- 
uineness is  the  reason  why  he  states  that  "  the  Apocalypse  may  be 
ranked  among  the  antilegomena,  if  it  is  thouglit  proper,"'*  would  ac- 
cordingly be  no  other  than  Dionysius  f  who  denied  that  the  Apoc- 
alypse is  a  production  of  Saint  John,  merely  from  internal  reasons. 
The  disposition  of  Eusebius  to  adopt  as  his  own  the  opinion  of  this 
Dionysius,  (whom,  in  the  preface  to  the  seventh  book  of  his  ec- 
clesiastical history,  he  denominates  the  great  bishop  of  Alexandria,) 
is  manifest,  not  only  from  his  wavering  remarks  on  it,  HI.  25,  but 
particularly  from  HI.  39,  where  he  seizes  with  so  much  eagerness, 
the  opportunity  for  favouring  the  hypothesis  that  the  Apocalypse 
was  the  production  of  some  other  John.  But  this  same  passage  also 
proves  that  he  still  felt  some  timidity  in  asserting  this  hypothesis ; 
as  he  adds  :  *'  if  we  would  not  rather  receive  the  Apocalypse  as  the 
production  of  the  first  John  (the  apostle.")  It  cannot  be  admitted, 
that  the  tcvtg  oT  dOsiovoi  iriv' yJTio'AuXvxpLv  lov  Jmolvvov^  i.  e.  some, 
who  reject  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  were  those  who  attributed  it  to 
-         -^ — ^ ^ ^ — ^ 

^  O'v;  jtat  avdyxaiov  nQocs/siv  tov  vovv  sixog  ydg  tov  devTSgov,  d  (ii'j  Tt§ 
t&iXoL  TOV  TiQMTOV,  TTjV  ETC  ovofiuTog  q)£go[iivrjv  ^Ibjuvvov  dnojiukvipiv  kMQa- 
xivai,  Eccl.  Hist.  III.  39. 

9  Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.  VI.  14. 
-  3  Slromat.  VI.  ed.  Colon.  U)88.  p.  001.  Paeda^rng.  L.  II.  p.  201. 

4  Ecclos.  Hist.  III.  25.  5  Enseb.  Ecclcs.  Hist.  VII.  25. 


6$  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK, 


the  hereiic  Cerinthus,  namely  Caius  and  the  Alogians  ;  because,  if 
Eusebius  had  alluded  only  to  the  opinion  of  such  as  ascribed  it  to 
Cerinthus  the  heretic,  he  would  have  been  obliged  to  place  it 
among  the  third  class,  or  that  of  heretical  writings. 

Eichhorn,  whose  Introduction  may  be  consulted  on  the  declara- 
tions of  Eusebius  relative  to  the  Apocalypse,^  regards  these  t#i/«?  as 
persons  who  were  contemporaneous  with  Eusebius,  but  whose  testi- 
mony cannot  determine  the  genuineness  of  the  Apocalypse,  as  they 
lived  in  so  late  an  age.  Hug,  in  his  Introd.^  also  infers  from  Euse- 
bius III.  25,  that  the  opinion  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  was  a 
popular  one  in  the  days  of  Eusebius. 

III.  3.     Testimony  oj  Dionysius  himself,  to  whose  opinion  Eu- 
sebius inclines. 

Dionysius,  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  although  as  much  prejudiced 
against  the  Revelation  as  Eusebius,  is  as  little  able  as  either  Origen 
or  Eusebius,  to  advance  any  testimony  of  witnesses  before  his  time, 
against  the  genuineness  of  this  book.  The  reader  may  consult  "  On 
the  Object  of  John,"  p.  73,  79  etc.  137—141  :  and  compare  the 
"  Apology  for  the  Revelation,"  ^5.  Eusebius ^  makes  ample  quo- 
tations from  Dionysius'  second  book  "  On  the  promises,"  m()i  inay- 
yi)A(3Dv.  This  work  was  written  against  the  followers  of  Nepos,  who 
was  well  known  in  Egypt,  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  as 
the  defender  of  the  views  of  the  Chiliasts.  According  to  Eusebius, 
Dionysius  makes  the  following  remarks :  *'  that  before  his  time,  some 
(iivtg  Tipo'  fJjLKoi^j  i.  e.  the  Alogians,)  had  rejected  this  book,  and 
ascribed  it  to  Cerinthus :  but  he  himself  would  not  presume  to  re- 
ject it ;  as  many  of  his  christian  brethren  held  it  in  high  estima- 
tion : — lyoj  Si  aOfT^oai  fniv  ovx  uv  joXfi^occLfii  to  §t§Xiovy  tioIXmv 
amo  did  anovdrjg  lyoviov  ccdflqcjv." — The  TroAAot  ddsXqol  (many 
christian  brethren),  seem  to  be  a  counterpart  to  the  ziptg  n^o  vf^wv, 
who  rejected  the  Apocalypse  ;  and  also  to  have  been  Christians,  who 
lived  before  his  time.""* — "  That,  although  he  himself  is  unable  to 
comprehend  the  Apocalypse,  he  would  be  far  from  rejecting  it  on 
that  account ;  that  he  believes  it  to  be  the  production  of  an  ortho- 
dox Christian,  who  wrote  it  by  divine  inspiration, — dylov  iivog  xat 
'^tonvivaiov  Ht'ut,  nvpaivbj-  but  that  he  cannot  well  adimt  (ov  gadi cog 
uv  GvvOomt)  it  to  be  a  production  of  the  apostle  John,  the  son  of 
Zebedee  and  brother  of  James,  and  author  of  the  Gospel  and  cath- 
olic epistle ;  because  the  entire  character  of  the  Apocalypse,  as  to 
its  matter  and  form,  its  contents  and  style,  thoughts  and  expression, 


1  Vol.  II.  part.  2d.  p.  421—425.         2  Part  I.  p.  S7  etc.  Andover  ed. 

3  Eccles.  Hist.  VII.  25.  4  See  "  On  the  object  of  John,"  p.  73,138. 


^3.]  ANTILEGOMENA APOCALYPSE.  67 

^&og^  loyojv  ftdog,  vor^naju,  gtjfiaja  xal  avfiahg  tow  Qij^axmit 
<f>gaotg^  is  different  from  the  Gospel  and  first  epistle  of  John.  Par- 
ticularly, that  the  apostle  John  never  mentions  his  own  name  in  the 
Gospel,  or  first  epistle  ;  but  that  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  re- 
peatedly does.^  That  he  therefore  believes  the  Apocalypse  to  be 
the  production  of  another  John,  who  had  resided  in  Asia."  From 
these  ample  quotations  of  Eusebius,  we  perceive  that  the  opinion  of 
Dionysius  was  mere  conjecture,  built  on  internal  evidence  ;  that  he 
adduces  no  testimony  of  earlier  witnesses  against  the  Revelation, 
except  of  those  who  ascribed  it  to  Cerinthus  ;  yet  to  such  testimony 
he  would  undoubtedly  have  appealed,  had  he  been  acquainted  with 
any  ;  for  he  was  an  enemy  of  the  Chiliasts,  and  laboured  to  detract 
from  the  authority  of  the  Revelation,  or  at  least  to  disprove  its 
being  a  production  of  the  apostle  John  ; — and  finally,  that  it  is  not 
without  some  distrust  and  timidity,  that  he  himself  proposes  his 
hypothesis.^ 

Moreover,  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  influence  of  Dionysius, 
together  with  the  prevailing  animosity  against  the  Chiliasts,  and  the 
obscurity  of  the  Apocalypse  itself,  contributed  much  to  bring  sus- 
picion on  the  genuineness  of  this  book,  pretty  generally  in  the  Greek 
church,  during  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century.^ 

III.  4.     The  testimony  of  the  writers  'prior  to  Origen  and  Eu- 
sebius, is  deddedhj  in  favour  of  the  Apocalypse, 

An  investigation  of  the  more  ancient  testimony,  reaching  beyond 
the  times  of  Origen  and  Eusebius,  affords  the  following  results. 

I.  In  the  phrase,  at  the  last  trump,  if  ta^^asri  auXmyyi,  used  by 
Paul  in  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,^  there  seems  to  be  an  al- 
lusion to  the  Apocalypse,  10:  7.  11:  15 — 18  ;  or  rather  the  apos- 
tle seems  to  presuppose  this  Apocalyptical  mark  of  time  to  be  already 
known.^  There  is  nothing  in  the  whole  context  of  Paul,  which  can 
serve  to  explain  this  phraseology.  Nor  can  it  be  proved  historical- 
ly, that  the  Jewish  conceits  of  the  seven  trumpets,  \vere  current  among 
them  so  early  as  the  age  of  Paul.  But  even  if  they  were,  and  Paul 
meant  to  allude  to  them,  and  presupposed  them  known  to  his  read- 
ers, he  would  have  expressed  himself  in  a  different  manner.  For 
according  to  the  Jewish  sayings,  the  dead  were  to  be  resuscitated 

1  The  internal  arguments,  which  Dionysius  urofes  against  the  genuineness 
of  the  Revelation,  are  refuted  in  Eichhorn's  Introduction,  sup.  cit.  6  196.  p. 
435—443. 

2  Comp.  Schmidt's  Introd.  part.  II.  p.  20.    Eichhorn,  sup.  cit.  p.  418  etc. 

3  See  the  "  Apoloi^y  for   the  Revelation,"  p.  40— 43,  and   *' On  the  Object  of 
\  John,"  p.  140  etc.  4  Chap.  XV.  52. 

5  See  "  Apol.  for  Revel."  §  13,  and  "  On  the  Object  of  John,"  §  30. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TilST*  [bK,  I. 


gradually,  during  the  sound  of  all  the  seven  trumpets  ;  but  accord- 
ing to  this  passage  of  Paul,  only  at  the  sound  of  the  last  trumpet^ 
and  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  tv  uiofAM. — The  first  epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  was  written  at  Ephesus,^  whither  the  Revelation  was- 
also  sent.^ — See  the  objections  to  this  argument  in  Paulus'  Observ. 
ad  argumenta  de  origlne  Apoc.  Joanneae  externa,  Jen.  1800.  p.  9 
etc.  and  compare  the  reply  to  them  in  the  programm.  Symb.  ad 
illustranda  ea  loca,  quae  de  nuQuvola  Christi  agunt,  part  II.  p.4 — 11, 

II.  Neither  Papias,  Polycarp  nor  Ignatius  quotes  the  book  of 
Revelation."*  Neither  does  the  first  of  these  writers  quote  any  other 
book  of  the  New  Testament ;  and  yet  it  is  certain,  that  he  was  ac- 
quainted with  them.  He  himself  informs  us,  that^  he  confined  him- 
self to  the  oral  declarations  of  the  acquaintances  of  the  apostles; 
and  did  not  intend  to  quote  the  apostolical  writings. 

Polycarp's  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  consists  of  only  a  few  pa- 
ges, and  contains  no  quotation,  either  from  the  Gospel  or  the  Rev- 
elation of  John  ;  although  he  had  as  much  reason  to  cite  the  form- 
er as  the  latter.  The  epistles  of  Ignatius,  four  of  which  were  ad- 
dressed to  Smyrna,  Ephesus,  and  Philadelphia,  whither  the  Reve- 
lation was  also  sent,  have  most  probably  been  much  altered  and  in- 
terpolated :^ — but  even  admitting  that  the  Apocalypse  was  not  quo- 
ted in  his  epistles  as  they  came  from  his  hands,  this  by  no  means 
proves,  that  he  was  unacquainted  with  the  book  ;  for  in  hke  manner, 
in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  he  never  quotes  Paul's  epistle  to  that 
church,  with  which  he  certainly  was  acquainted.^ 

III.  The  Revelation  of  St.  John  is  wanting  in  the  Peschito  or 
old  Syriac  version."^     But, 

In  the  first  place,  it  cannot  be  proved,  that  it  was  originally  want- 
ing in  that  version.  The  apparent  obscurity  of  the  Revelation,  and 
the  fear  of  disseminating  Chiliastic  views  may  have  restrained  the 
public  use  of  it  in  the  churches  :  and  thus  have  made  copies  of  it  to 
be  scarce  :  and  this  would  account  for  the  want  of  them  in  the  Syriac 
manuscripts  which  have  been  brought  from  Mesopotamia  to  Europe. 


U  Cor.  16:  8.  2  Rev.  2:  1. 

3  Apology  for  Revel.  §  11.  4  Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.  III.  39. 

5  Apology  for  the  Revel,  p.  184.  Compare  Schmidt's  Manual  of  the  History 
of  the  Christian  Church,  pt.  I.  p.  209  etc. 

6  Compare  Hug's  Introduction,  pt.  H.  p.  405  etc. 

7  The  Peschito,  i.  e.  the  right  or  exact  version,  was  executed  if  not  in  the  first 
century,  at  least  in  the  early  age  of  tlie  church.  It  is  used  exclusively  by  all 
Christians  in  Syria  and  the  East ;  and  Michaelis  pronounces  it  to  be  the  very 
best  translation  of  the  Greek  Testament  which  he  ever  read,  for  the  general 
ease,  elegance  and  fidelity  with  which  it  has  been  executed.  It  however  does 
not  embrace  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  but  contiiinsonly  the  four  Gos- 
pels, the  Acts  of  the  apostles,  all  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  the  first  epistle  of  St. 
John  and  St.  Peter,  and  the  epistle  of  St.  James.     S. 


^  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA APOCALYPSE.  69 

Secondly,  it  is  certain  that  the  book  of  Revelation  was  known 
among  the  Syriac  christians  before  the  sixth  century,  in  the  be- 
ginning of  which  the  Philoxenian  version  was  executed.     Because 

It  is  quoted  in  the  fourth  century  by  Ephraim  in  his  ascetic  writ- 
mgs,  as  a  production  of  John  the  divine.     And 

In  the  earlier  part  of  the  third  century,  Hippolitus,  who  was  pro- 
bably Bishop  of  Aden  in  Arabia  fehx,  and  was  held  in  high  estima- 
tion by  the  Syrians,  vindicated  the  Apocalypse  against  the  attacks 
of  Caius. 

And,  in  the  second  century,  Theophilus  bishop  of  Antioch,  quotes 
passages  from  the  Apocalypse,^  in  his  work  against  Hermogenes. 

See  Hug's  Introduction,  part  I.  ^  65.  p.  204,  205,  Andover  ed. 
and  Eichhorn,  sup.  cit.  p.  432 — 435. 

IV.  Justin  Martyr  explicitly  ascribes  the  Revelation  to  John, 
one  of  the  apostles  of  the  Lord.  His  words  are  :  "A  certain  man 
of  the  name  of  JoAn,  in  the  Revelation  which  was  given  him,  pre- 
dicted etc.^  From  this  we  may  infer,  as  is  maintained  in  the  "  Apolo- 
gy for  the  Revelation,"  p.  306,  that  the  Apocalypse  was  known  to 
the  Ebionite  Christians  in  Samaria,  the  native  country  of  Justin. 

V.  Irenaeus  not  only  ascribes,  expressly,  and  in  various  passa- 
ges, the  book  of  Revelation  to  John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  and 
an  one  passage^  specifically  to  the  disciple  of  the  Lord  who  had  re- 
clined upon  the  Saviour's  breast;  but  he  also  appeals  to  faithful  and 
ancient  manuscripts  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  to  the  testimony  of  per- 
sonal acquaintances  of  the  apostle,  in  support  of  the  truth  of  the 
reading  "six  hundred  and  sixty  six,"  Rev.  13:  18.  He  remarks  : 
^'  This  number  is  found  in  all  the  carefully  executed  and  ancient 
transcripts :  and  is  supported  by  the  testimony  of  those,  who  had 
personally  seen  John  himself."'*  But  should  it  be  objected,  that  Ire- 
naeus may  have  received  incorrect  information  from  the  personal 
acquaintances  of  John,  in  this  instance  as  well  as  another  f  still, 
these  acquaintances  of  John  must  have  stated  something,  in  which 
John  was  mentioned  as  the  author  of  the  book,  containing  the  dis- 
puted reading.  The  grounds  for  receiving  the  testimony  of  Irenae- 
us, concerning  a  book  published  by  John  in  Asia  minor,  have  been 

1  Euseb.Eccl.Hisl.lv.  24. 

^  ^Avi'iQ  xiq,  o  ovofict  ^  lojdvvfjg,  dg  twv  ^  AnotTToXwv  tov  Xqkttov,  iv  Ajioa- 
KnXv^ju  yEvofisvt]  avTM — 7igosq)rjX6vaEj  x.  t.  X.  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  c.  81.  ed. 
Colon,  p.  308.  ' 

3  Adversus  Haereses,  L.  IV.  cap.  20.  §  11. 

^  Ev  naffi  Tolg  ajiodalotg  xal  «p;fa/ot$  avnyQoicpOLg  tov  aQi&fjiov  lovtov 
xsifiivov,  xal y,agTVQovvi(ov  umiav  indviav  %av  xai  bil^iv  tov  lotctvvtjv  kmgaxo-^ 
€wv,  Adv.  Haer.  V.  c  30.  §  1. 

i  Book  II.  c.  22.  §  5. 


70  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [b«. 


Stated  above,  (^  2.  111.  5.  in  the  note  following  the  testimony  of  Ire- 
naeus);  nor  can  they  be  destroyed,  by  the  supposition  that  Irenae- 
lis'  Montanlstic  views  may  have  inclined  him  to  favour  the  Apoca- 
lypse. See  "  Apology  for  the  Revelation,"  <§>  10.  ''  On  the  Ob- 
ject of  John,"  •§>  31. 

VI.  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  in  a  certain  place,*  quotes  the  Apoc- 
alypse with  these  words,  aig  qrjoi,v,  iv  rrj  ^noxalvyjet,  *J(odvvr]g,  i,  e. 
as  John  says  in  the  ApocalyjDse:  and  in  another  passage,^  with  the 
expression,  to  nsgiontov  rtjg  '^jtoazoXrAtjg  (fuvijg.^ 

VII.  Tertullian  declares  very  decisively  for  the  genuineness  of  the 
Apocalypse,  in  this  manner :  "  We  have  also  in  our  favour  the 
churches  of  John  ;  for  although  Marcion  rejected  his  Revelation, 
yet  the  whole  series  of  Bishops  from  the  beginning,  stand  up  for 
John  as  the  author."'* 

VIII.  Moreover,  there  are  other  data  from  which  it  may  be  in- 
ferred that  the  Apocalypse  was  known  in  the  earliest  times,  as  a 
production  of  the  apostle  John.  See  "  Apol.  for  Rev."  p.  75 — 85, 
165  he. 

Melito,  who  was  bishop  of  Sardis  during  the  reign  of  Marcus 
Aurelius,  wrote  on  the  Revelation  of  John,  negl  r^?  ' u^noaaXvxpnag 
*I(aavvov'  as  we  are  informed  by  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ecc.  IV.  26. — 
Eusebius  must  have  been  acquainted  with  this  work,  for  speaking 
of  the  writings  of  Melito  and  Apollinarius,  he  says  ;  "  These  have 
come  to  our  knowledge,"  dg  lii^iiteQuv  yvnatv  ucptazaif  H.  E.  IV. 
26.  Of  the  writings  of  Apollinarius,  he  remarks ':  "  Among  the 
many  works  of  Apollinarius  which  are  extant,  the  following  have 
come  to  my  knowledge,"  tov  ' yJuoXXivaglov  noXX(ov  Ttaga  noXXo7g 
G(a^otitt>o)v  TO.  etg  i^fAug  iX&ovra,  Ibid.  c.  27.  Had  Melito  harbour- 
ed any  doubt  respecting  the  Revelation,  Eusebius  would  certainly 
have  mentioned  the  fact.^  This  Melito  was  the  person,  who  insti- 
tuted a  very  close  examination  relative  to  the  canon  of  the  Old 
Testament ;  as  we  learn  from  Eusebius,  loc.  sup.  cit. 

Praxeas,  in  the  second  century,  adduces  a  passage  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse (I.  8.)  in  support  of  his  Patripassianism ;  although  he  was  no 
longer  a  Montanist,  when  he  published  his  heretical  views  relative 
to  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  divinity  ;  for  of  him,  Tertullian  makes 
the  remark,^  "  prophetiam  expuHt  et  haeresin  intulit,"  i.  e.  he  cast 
out  prophecy  and  brought  in  heresy. 

ApoUonius  (another  writer  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second  cen- 

1  Stromal.  L.  I,  cap.  6. 

9  Paedagog.  Lib.  2,  cap.  12.  ^^  See  Eichhorn,  sup.  cit.  p.  399  &c. 

4  Habemus  et  Joannis  ecclesias  alumnas.  Nam  etsi  apocalypsin  ejus  Marcion 
respuit ;  ordo  tamen  episcoporum  ad  origineni  recensus,  in  Joannem  stabit  auc- 
torem."     Advers.  Marc.  L  IV.  c.  5. 

o  See  Hug's  Introd.  pt.  II.  p.  400.  6  Advers.  Praxeanij  c.  1. 


^  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA APGCALYPSE.  71 

tury,  against  whom  an  entire  book  of  the  lost  writings  of  TertuHian 
was  directed,^)  also  adduced  proofs  from  the  Revelation  of  John,  in 
his  work  against  the  Montanists.  Eusebius  says  :~  x*/{?»;rat  di  xai 
fiUQTvgiaig  ano  T7]g\/o}avpov^y^7io'Aakvip6iog^  i.  e.  he  made  use  of 
proofs  taken  from  the  Revelation  of  John.  ^ 

TertuUian  himself^  states  objections  against  Montanism,  which  the 
catholic  Christians  derived  from  the  book  of  Revelation  ;  and  he 
replies  to  them  by  other  passages  from  the  same  book.  It  was  the 
practice  of  TertuUian,  when  writing  against  his  opposers,  to  adduce 
passages  only  from  such  books  as  were  received  as  genuine  by 
them. 

Jerome,  in  his  epistle  to  Dardanus,  remarks  that,  contrary  to  the 
prevailing  custom  of  the  Greek  church  in  that  age,  he  received  the 
Apocalypse  ;  veterum  scriptorum  auctoritatem  sequens,qui  plerumque 
ejus  abutuntur  testimoniis,  non  ut  interdum  de  apocryphis  facere 
Solent,  sed  quasi  canonicis  et  ecclesiasticis,  i.  e.  following  the  au- 
thority of  the  ancient  writers,  who  indeed  generally  perverted  its 
declarations,  yet  not  by  treating  it  as  they  sometimes  did  the  Apoc- 
rypha, but  while  regarding  it  as  a  canonical  book  received  by  the 
churches.^ 

IX.  On  the  other  hand  it  cannot  be  proved,  that  the  Apocalypse 
was  disputed  before  the  third  century.  ^ 

Irenaeus"^  does  not  say,  that  those  opposers  of  the  Montanists  who 
disputed  the  continuance  of  the  extraordinary  gifts  of  the  spirit  in 
the  church,  and  who  rejected  the  Gospel  of  John,  rejected  also  the 
Apocalypse  ;  but  merely  says  :  "  Evangelium  Johannis  et  propheti- 
cam  gratiam  repellunt  ex  ecclesia."  Even  in  Book  V.  26  &;c. 
where  he  speaks  so  circumstantially  of  the  Apocalypse,  he  adduces 
no  objections  of  those  who  were  termed  Alogians,  against  it. 

When  Dionysius,  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  says  :* 
zivig  ngo  tjiacji/  i^d^sitjxaoi  xrjv  " ^no'AaXvxiitv,  i.  e.  some  before  our 
day,  have  rejected  the  Revelation  ;  it  does  not  by  any  means  follow, 
that  these  some  lived  so  early  as  the  second  century.  He  uses  the 
term  ngoavsnavaaio,  9  when  speaking  of  Nepos  who  lived  in  the 
third  century.  Dionysius  undoubtedly  alluded  to  those  Alogians, 
in  the  earlier  part  of  the  third  century,  who  under  the  guidance  of 
Caius,  attributed  the  Apocalypse  to   Cerinthus.!*^     Hug^^  thinks  he 

1  Jerome,  de  viris  illustribus,s.  voce  Apollonius. 

2  Eccl.  Hist.  V,  18.  3  See  Hug's  Introd,  Part.  H.  p.  496  &c. 

4  De  pudicitia,  c.  19.  5  See  "  Apology  for  the  Revelation,"  §  3. 

6  See,  "  On  the  Object  of  John,"  §§  24,  25,  36,  34.  p.  126  &c. 

7  Adv.  Haeres.ni.c.  11.  §  9. 

8  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  VH.  25.  9  Euseb.  H.  E.  VH.  24. 

10  Euseb.  H.  E.  HI.  28.  comp.  VII.  25.  See  also  Eichhorn,sup.  cit.  p.  416  «fec. 

11  Inlrod.  pt.  II.  p.  410. 


72  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

alluded  to  those  his  opponents,  whom  Nepos  drew  together  by  his 
•Chiliasm,  during  the  heat  of  the  contests  in  regard  to  the  Apoca- 
lypse. 

It  cannot  be  proved  that  the  eighty  fifth  Apostolical  Canon, 
which  certainly  doubted  the  genuineness  of  the  Revelation,  made 
its  appearance  prior  to  the  fourth  century ;  at  which  time  it  must  be 
conceded,  many  entertained  such  doubts.  ^ 

Moreover,  Origen  would  not  have  classed  the  Apocalypse  among 
the  universally  received  books,  nor  would  Eusebius  have  left  it 
optional  to  place  it  among  the  homologoumena,  if  any  serious  doubts 
had  been  entertained,  in  the  catholic  church,  before  their  time, 
concerning  its  genuineness.     See  Illustrations  1,  2. 

III.  5.  Even  the  open  assailants  of  the  Apocalypse  do  not  deny, 
that  this  hook  was  believed  to  he  genuine,  from  the  earliest  times. 

r  None  of  the  earlier  or  later  opposers  of  this  book,  has  assailed  it 
with  historical  arguments  ;  nor  been  led  to  doubt  its  genuineness, 
by  the  want  of  historical  testimony  in  its  favour. 

I.  As  the  Alogians  could  not  well  have  rejected  the  undisputed 
Gospel  of  John,  for  any  other  reason  than  this,  that  they  were  un- 
able to  defend  themselves  against  the  Montanists,  without  discarding 
the  book  which  contained  the  promises  of  the  Paraclete  and  of 
extraordinary  gifts  of  the  spirit  f  so  it  might  naturally  have  been 
expected,  that  for  similar  reasons,  they  would  also  reject  the 
Revelation  of  John.  According  to  the  testimony  of  history,^  it 
appears  that  Caius  first  took  this  course,  in  his  dispute  against  the 
Montanist  Proclus,  under  the  Roman  Bishop  Zephyrinus.  Euse- 
bius says,"*  that  Caius  attributed  the  Revelations,  which  were  circu- 
lated under  the  name  of  a  great  apostle,  to  Cerinthus,  a  vindicator 
of  the  personal  reign  of  Christ  on  earth. ^  How  easily  might  the 
Alogians,  in  the  heat  of  controversy  against  the  Montanists,  have 
fallen  upon  the  assertion,  that  the  Revelation  was  not  the  produc- 
tion of  John  or  of  any  other  catholic  Christian,  but  of  that  heresiarch 
Cerinthus,  before  whom  John  is  said  to  have  fled  from  the  bath  ?^ 

1  See  "  Apology  for  Revel."  p.  57  &c.  and  "The  Object  of  John,"  p.  126,  133. 

2  "  On  the  Object  of  John's  Gospel,"  §  27.  Compare  the  passage  of  Irenaeus 
above  quoted,  L.  III.  c.  11,  §  9. 

3  Euseb.  H.  E.  11.  25.     III.  28.  VI.  20.  4  H.  E.  III.  28. 

5  See  •'  On  the  Object  of  John's  Gospel,"  p.  05  &c.— The  opinion  that  Caius 
IS  speaking  of  the  Apocalypse,  is  maintained  by  Schmidt,  in  his  Introd.  II.  p.  14. 
and  Eichhorn,  sup.  cit.  p.  414.— Hug  on  the"^  contrary,  (Part  II.  p.  419— 421.) 
with  Paulus,  in  Historia  Cerinthi,  P.  I.  §  30,  believes  that  Caius  refers  to  a 
spurious  Revelation  current  under  the  name  of  some  celebrated  apostle.  He  ap- 
peals to  it  as  a  fact,  that  neither  Eusebius  himself,  nor  Jerome,  nor  Photius, 
mentions  any  unfavourable  opinion  entertained  by  Caius  relative  to  the  Revela- 
tion. 6  Apology  for  the  Revelation,  p.  121. 


'^  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA APOCALYPSE.  73 

Dionysius*  specifies  their  objections  to  the  Revelation  :  "  They 
pass  through  the  whole  of  this  book  from  chapter  to  chapter,  and 
show  that  there  is  neither  sense  nor  connexion  in  it ;  and  they  pro- 
nounce the  superscription,  which  bears  the  name  of  John,  to  be 
spurious.  They  say,  it  cannot  be  called  a  Revelation,  because  it 
is  in  the  highest  degree  obscure  and  unintelligible, — acpodgw  xat 
nax^l  }(fxaXvfi(Aivfj  tw  Ttjg  dypoiag  naQaniTaaf^art^  covered  by  a 
strong  and  dense  veil  of  ignorance  ; — that  Cerinthus  wrote  it  him- 
self, for  one  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  his  system  is,  the  per- 
sonal reign  of  Christ  on  earth."  Had  this  antichiliastic  Dionysius 
been  acquainted  with  any  historical  objections,  which  were  urged  by 
these  people  against  the  Revelation,  he  would  undoubtedly  have 
stated  them,  as  he  was  so  desirous  to  detract  from  the  authority  of 
this  book. 

Another  internal  proof,  which  the  Alogians  advanced  against  the 
genuineness  of  the  Apocalypse,  is  still  more  insignificant.  It  is 
stated  by  Epiphanius,  Haeres.  51. 

II.  Dionysius  himself  questioned  the  genuineness  of  the  Revela- 
tion, solely  on  the  ground  of  internal  evidence.  See  111.  4,  of  this 
section. 

III.  Finally  :  the  later  assailants  of  the  Revelation  likewise,  were 
not  induced  by  historical  evidence  to  reject  that  book.  It  is  histori- 
cally certain,  that  the  objections  urged  in  the  fourth  century,  were 
the  obscurity  of  the  book,  and  the  Chiliastic  views  which  it  was 
supposed  to  contain.  Epiphanius  ascribes  the  doubt  of  his  contem- 
poraries, not  to  the  ancient  historical  accounts,  but  to  their  em- 
barrassment, when  they  attempted  its  explanation. — With  the  con- 
clusion, to  which  we  are  brought  by  the  discussion  contained  in  this 
Illustration,  Schmidt  and  Hug  and  Eichhorn  coincide. 

Supijlementary  note. 

On  the  internal  evidence  for  and  against  the  genuineness  of  the  Apocalypse. 

On  this  subject  the  reader  may  consult  Kleuker's  "  Full  investiga- 
tion of  the  evidences  for  the  frenuineness  and  credibiHty  of  the  origi- 
nal records  of  Christiaiiity,"  Hanlein's  Introduction,  Criesinger's  In- 
troduction, and  Eichhorn's  Introduction. 

The  principal  internal  evidences  stated  in  these  works,  in  favour 
of  the  genuineness  of  the  Apocalypse,  are  the  following: 

1.  Tliis  book  must  have  been  written  in  the  apostolical  age — be- 
cause, the  description  of  the  seven  churches  supposes  an  existing 
contest  between  Christianity  and  Judaism,  and  an  oppression  of  the 
Christians  by  the  Jews ;   consequently  it  involves  a  historical  fact, 


'  As  quoted  by  Euseb.  U.  E.  VII.  26. 
10 


74  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK. 


which  occurred  only  in  the  apostohc  age.     It  likewise  contains  no 
traces  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  as  a  past  event. 

2.  The  historical  interest  and  psychological  fidelity  with  which  it 
is  penned,  militate  against  the  suspicion  of  its  being  supposititious. — 
This  is  peculiarly  applicable  to  the  addresses  to  the  angels  of  the 
seven  churches,  chap.  I — III ;  in  which  the  writer  could  not  have 
had  his  eye  on  fictitious  characters  and  circumstances. 

This  argument  holds  good  against  the  hypothesis,  that  the  seven 
apocalyptical  epistles  are  a  mere  poetic  fiction.  Eichhorn,  sup.  cit. 
p.  391,403. 

3.  The  apostle  John  here  characterises  himself: 

In  chap.  I.  12,  he  professes  to  be  John  ;  and  declares  that  he 
was  an  eye-witness,  and  an  ear-witness,  of  the  history  of  Jesus. 

In  chap.  I.  9,  he  professes  to  have  been  banished  to  the  isle  of 
Patmos,  for  being  a  minister  of  Christ ;  and  this  is  precisely  what 
we  are  told  concerning  the  apostle  John,  by  the  unanimous  tradition 
of  the  ancient  church. 

4.  The  style  of  the  Apocalypse  resembles  that  of  the  Gospel  and 
epistles  of  John,  both  in  regard  to  the  ideas  and  the  phraseology. — 
The  reader  may  consult  Schultze  on  the  character  and  merits  of 
John  as  a  writer. 

The  internal  evidence  against  the  Apocalypse,  is  derived 

1.  From  the  supposed  obscurity  and  ofFensiveness  of  its  contents^ 
as  well  as  from  the  doctrinal  errors,  contradictions  etc,  which  some 
have  imagined  they  could  discover  in  it.  This  objection  may  be 
confronted  by  a  correct  explanation  of  the  book,  and  by  doctrinal 
arguments. 

1.  From  the  difference  between  the  Apocalypse  and  other  writ- 
ings of  John,  in  regard  to  matter  and  manner.  But  this  diversity  is 
accounted  for,  by  the  following  considerations : 

The  Apocalypse  was  written  earlier,  than  the  Gospel  and  epistles 
of  John.  It  was  composed  during  the  reign  of  Claudius  or  Nero, 
according  to  the  "  Apology  for  the  Revelation,"  <5»  14. 

Again,  the  difference  in  the  nature  of  the  subjects,  necessarily  led 
the  writer  to  different  methods  of  handling  them. 

The  book  of  Revelation  is  written  in  imitation  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets. — It  is  on  this  principlcj  that  Eichhorn  accounts  for  the 
author's  prefixing  his  name  to  the  book ;  which  is  not  the  case  with 
the  Gospels  and  epistles.  But  in  historical  works  also,  it  was  not 
customary  for  the  writer  to  prefix  his  name  ;  as  the  example  of  the 
other  three  Gospels  evinces.  The  first  epistle  of  John  is  rather  a 
dissertation  than  a  letter. 


§   3.]  ANTILEGOMENA EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS.  t6 

Inferential  remark  on  all  the  preceding  Illustrations  of  this 
paragraph. 

The  discussion  embraced  in  the  five  preceding  Illustrations,  clear- 
ly evinces  the  inaccuracy  of  the  statement  of  Kleuker,  and  which 
he  presents  as  the  result  of  an  investigation  of  the  testimony  of  an- 
tiquity :  "  That  in  the  second  and  third  centuries,  no  certain  informa- 
tion could  be  found,  respecting  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse." 

III.  6.      View  of  the   evidence  for  (he  genuineness  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebreius. 

The  arguments,  which  prove  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  be  a 
production  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  are  the  following  : 

I.  The  earliest  writers  of  the  Greek  Church,  received  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  as  a  production  of  Paul. 

Jerome,  a  man  of  much  erudition  and  extensive  reading,  appeals 
to  the  testimony  of  all  ancient  Greek  writers,  in  the  following  words, 
extracted  from  his  letter  to  Dardanus,  «§>3  :  "  It  is  to  be  remarked, 
that  this  epistle,  which  is  addressed  to  the  Hebrews,  was  received 
as  a  production  of  the  apostle  Paul  not  only  by  the  oriental  churches, 
but  by  all  the  Greek  ecchsiasticcd  writers ;  although  the  greater 
part  of  us  ascribe  it  either  to  Barnabas  or  Clemens  :"  and  further 
on  :  "  Nevertheless  I  receive  it  as  genuine,  not  influenced  by  the 
prevaiHng  opinion  of  the  present  day,  but  guided  by  the  authority  of 
the  ancient  writers."^  The  word  plerique,  (plerique  nostrorum,) 
must  refer  to  Christians  in  the  Latin  church ;  and  not  to  Eastern 
Christians,  with  whom  they  are  contrasted.  See  the  Introduction  to 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  page  27,  note.'-^ 

Eusebius,  in  his  history,  says :  "  The  fourteen  epistles  of  Paul  are 
before  the  public,  and  well  known  ;  but  it  should  not  be  forgotten, 
that  some  have  rejected  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  alleging  that  it 
was  not  received  by  the  church  of  Rome  as  a  production  of 
Paul."^ — Thus  also  Origen  speaks  "^  of  persons  who  could  not  con- 
sistently admit  the  validity  of  arguments  brought  from  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  if  they  followed  the  authority  of  those  who  rejected  it, 

i  "  lllud  nostris  dicenduin  est,  banc  epistolam,  quae  inscribitur  ad  Hebraeos, 
not!  solum  ab  ecclesiis  orientis,  sed  ab  omnibus  retro  ecclesiasticis  Graect  ser- 
monis  scriptoribus,  quasi  Pauli  apostoli  suscipi,  licet  plerique  earn  vol  Baruabae, 
vei  dementis  arbitrantiir  ;"  and  farther  on,  *'  Nos  earn  suscipimus  nequaquam 
hujus  temporisconsuetudinem,  sed  veterum  scriptorum  auctoritatem  sequentes." 

2  See  also  Hug's  Introd.  p.  317,  319. 

^  Tov  IlavXov  ngodtjXot  xat  aacpstg  at  dsxatiaaageg  [sTiicrtoXai')  oti>  ye  fjtrjy 
tivegrjd-eitjxaai  rijv  7iQog'£^Qaiovg,  7iQ6gTrjg''Poifiai(ov  ixxXrjaiag  wg  fxi]  Ilav- 
Xov ovaav  avxi)v  avTiXiyea&ai  (prjcravjeg,  ov  dlxaiov  ayvotlv.  E.  H.  III.  3. 

4  Ep.  ad  Africanum,  §  9.  Comment,  in  Matt.  23:  37. 


76  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I, 

u&tTOvviMv  Tf]v  iniGiolriv. — It  does  not  follow,  that  the  rivig  of 
Eusebius,  were  writers;  but  even  if  they  were,  they  did  not  appeal 
to  older  Greek  writers,  but  only  to  the  Roman  churchJ  "  This 
word  Ttvt?  indicates  merely  an  exception  to  the  general  opinion  of 
the  Greeks,  there  being  some  who  were  influenced  by  respect  or 
prepossession  for  the  Romans  :  and  this  exception  is  itself  a  proof, 
that  the  Greek  church  at  large  acknowledged  this  epistle  as  a  pro- 
duction of  the  apostle  Paul,  according  to  the  well  known  principle, 
exceplio  finnat  regulam.""^  "  The  fact,  that  the  Arians  were  the 
first  in  the  Greek  churches,  whom  history  taxes  with  denying  Paul 
to  be  the  author  of  this  epistle,  adds  no  ordinary  degree  of  weight 
to  the  declarations  of  Eusebius ;  and  recommends  his  character,  as  a 
historian  whom  no  predilection  for  a  party  could  betray  into  a  de- 
parture from  historical  truth/' 

Origen  says  :  "  It  was  not  without  cause,  that  the  ancients  re- 
garded this  as  an  epistle  of  Paul. "^  His  own  opinion  was,  that  the 
ideas  are  those  of  Paul,  though  not  the  style.  He  therefore  does 
not  determine  who  the  author  was  ;  i/s  (says  he)  o  ygccxpag  zrjv  ima- 
joXijv,  TO  dXrj&ig  {>£ug  oldev,  i.  e.  who  it  was  that  wrote  this  epistle, 
God  only  knows.  Had  he  been  acquainted  with  any  testimony 
against  the  genuineness  of  this  epistle,  he  would  not  have  failed  to 
mention  it. 

The  hypotheses  of  Clemens  of  Alexandria  and  of  Pantaenus,  con- 
cerning this  epistle,  seem  to  presuppose  the  voice  of  history  to  be 
that  Paul  was  its  author.  "  The  remark,"  says  Hug,  "  was  made 
in  Alexandria,  at  an  eady  day,  that  the  style  of  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  was  strikingly  diverse  from  that  of  the  other  writings  of 
Paul.  But  although  this  observation  appeared  to  lead  directly  to 
the  idea  of  a  different  author,  no  one  dared  to  deny  that  it  was  a 
production  of  this  Apostle.  So  firm  was  their  conviction  of  Paul's 
being  its  author,  that  apparently  strong  arguments  to  the  contrary 
could  not  shake  their  behef."  Clemens  Alexandrinus  attempted  to 
account  for  this  difference  between  the  style  of  this  epistle,  and  that 
of  the  other  writings  of  Paul,  by  supposing  that  Paul  wrote  the 
epistle  in  Hebrew,  and  that  it  was  translated  into  Greek  by  Luke, 
to  whose  Acts  of  the  apostles  its  style  bore  much  resemblance.'*  The 
same  writer  accounts  for  Paul's  neglecting  to  give  a  superswiption 
to  this  epistle,  by  supposing  it  to  be  a  measure  of  precaution,  which 
the  apostle  adopted  in  order  that  the  Jews  might  not  be  deterred 
from  reading  the  epistle,  by  any  thing  repulsive  in  its   commence- 

l  Introd.  to  Heb.  §  2.  coinp.  Hug.  p.  317.  2  Hug,  sup.  cit.  p.  320. 

'  Ovx  BMij   ol  agx«1oi>   iivdgsg  wg   IlavXov  ainriv  (lavTigv  iijy  inKrwXriv) 
nagadBdiajcciai.  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  25. 
•1  Euscb.  H.  E.   VI.  U. 


^  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS.  77 

inent ;  for  the  Jews  were  prejudiced  against  him  as  being  an  apos- 
tle of  the  Gentiles.  Pantaenus  attributes  the  omission  to  the  mod- 
esty of  Paul,  which  would  not  permit  him,  an  apostle  of  the  gentiles, 
to  prefix  his  name  to  an  epistle  whicii  was  addressed  to  Jewish 
Christians,  who  had  heard  the  voice  of  the  Saviour  himself.^ 

Stephanus  Gobarus,  in  Photii  Biblioth.  Cod.  232,  does  indeed  say, 
*•  Irenaeus  and  his  abbreviator  Hippolytus  (who  may  both  be  classed 
with  the  writers  of  the  Greek  and  oriental  church,)  declare,  that  the 

'  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  not  a  production  of  Paul."  But  Steph- 
anus Gobarus  and  Photius  are  doubtless  guilty  of  a  historical  blun- 
der ;  inferring  that  this  epistle  was  rejected  by  Irenaeus  and 
Hyppolytus,  because  it  is  not  quoted  by  them ;  and  then  staling 
this  their  own  inference,  as  if  it  were  the  express  declaration  of 
those  writers.  For  in  the  same  passage  in  which  they  attribute 
these  declarations  to  Irenaeus  and  Hyppolytus,  Stephanus  is  guilty 
of  a  similar  error,  and  Photius  of  a  much  greater  one. — It  cannot 

•  well  be  supposed,  that  in  some  work  now  lost,  Irenaeus  denied  the 
genuineness  of  this  epistle ;  for  such  a  fact  would  not  have  escaped 
the  notice  of  Eusebius,  who  was  so  careful  to  collect  the  opinions  of 
the  ancients  relative  to  this  epistle.  That  Irenaeus  quotes  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  in  one  of  his  works  now  lost,  we  learn  from 
Eusebius ;  ^  and  the  reason  of  his  not  citing  it  in  his  work  against 
the  gnostics,  probably  was,  that  the  gnostics  all  rejected  this  epistle 
which  was  so  directly  opposed  to  their  system  ;  and  Irenaeus  deter- 
mined to  confront  them  with  such  books  only,  as  they  themselves 
acknowledged  to  be  genuine.^  Hug  accounts  for  this  circumstance 
from  the  connexion  of  Irenaeus  with  the  occidental  church,  in  which, 
on  account  of  the  Montanists,  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  used 
with  cautious  reluctance,  even  at  that  early  day.'* 

It  cannot  be  proved,  that  the  translation  of  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, contaii:ed  in  the  ancient  Syriac  version,  the  Peschito,  was 
made  at  a  later  date  than  that  of  the  other  books ;  and  hence,  it 
cannot  be  inferred  from  this  version,  that  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
brews was  long  doubted,  and  received  into  the  canon  only  at  a  la- 
ter day.^ 

II.  The  contrary  opinion  of  the  Latin  church,  which,  as  wc  learn 
frbm  Jerome,  ascribed  it  to  Barnabas^  or  Clemens,  though  old,  is 
nevertheless  unfounded.  .:! 


'    Euseb.  sup.  cit. 

2  Hist.  Eccl.  V.  26.  3  See  "  Introd.  to  Heb."  §  3. 

4  Hug,  sup.  cit.  321  &c. 

5  See  "  Introd.  to  Heb."  §  13.  Comp.  Hu^j's  Introd.  pt.  I.  §  GO.  p.  206—208, 
Andover  ed. 

6  The  supposition  that  Barnabas  was  author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  has 
been  advocated  of  late  by  Schmidt,  in  his  Introduction  to  N.  Test,  part  I.  p. 
2b9etc. 


78  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

The  antiquity  of  this  opinion  is  evinced  by  these  two  considera- 
tions :  first ;  It  can  be  proved  from  Tertullian  and  Epiphanius,  that 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  not  in  Marcion's  canon  ;  yet  Ter- 
tullian no  where  reproaches  Marcion  for  this  omission.  Second- 
ly ;  Tertullian  himself  utters  the  following  language  relative  to  this 
book  :  "  The  doctrines  of  the  apostles  should  be  the  principal 
source  of  instruction  and  direction  to  one  who  is  to  preside  over  the 
church  of  God.  I  will  however  adduce  the  additional  testimony  of 
one  of  the  companions  of  the  apostles.  For  we  have  the  epistle  of 
Barnabas  to  the  Hebrews,  a  man  of  so  great  authority,  that  Paul  pla- 
ces him  on  an  equahty  with  himself,  in  point  of  abstinence,  1  Cor. 
9:  6.  And  the  epistle  of  Barnabas  is  certainly  more  used  in  the 
churches,  than  that  apocryphal  Shepherd  of  adulterers.^" — The 
passage  Heb.  6:  1  etc,  is  then  adduced.^ 

It  is  probable,  that  the  Latin  church  held  this  epistle  in  higher 
estimation,  in  more  ancient  times,  than  they  did  in  the  days  of  Ter- 
tullian. The  epistle  which  Clemens  wrote  from  Rome,  in  the  name 
of  the  Roman  church,  to  the  Corinthians,  and  which  was  univer- 
sally acknowledged  as  genuine  ;  contained  a  great  number  of  quo- 
tations from  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Eusebius  says  :  "  Clem- 
ens, in  the  universally  received  epistle,  which  he  wrote  in  the  name 
of  the  Roman  church  to  the  church  of  the  Corinthians,  has  taken 
many  ideas  from  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrevs^s ;  nay  he  even  quotes 
passages  verbatim,  thus  clearly  evincing  that  this  epistle  is  not  a 
new  production. "3  It  can  scarcely  be  supposed,  that  Clemens,  in 
addressing  a  church  in  the  name  of  another  whole  church,  would 
have  quoted  so  much  from  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  if  it  were 
then  regarded  merely  as  an  epistle  of  Bartiabas.'* 

Moreover,  it  is  no  improbable  supposition,  that  the  opinion  adopt- 
ed by  the  Latin  church,  (viz.  that  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was 
written  by  Barnabas,)  was  brought  into  circulation  by  Marcion. 
He  was  excommunicated  by  his  father,  the  bishop  of  Pontus,  who 

1  Disciplina  ^postolorum  proprie  quidem  instruit  ac  determinat  principaliter 
sanctitatis  omnis  erga  templum  Dei  antistitem. — Volo  tamen  ex  redundantiaali- 
cujus  eliam  comitis  apostolorum  testimonium  superducere. — Extat  enim  at  Bar- 
nabae  iitubis  ad  Hciraeos,  adeo  satis  auctoritatis  viro,  ut  quem  Paulusjuxta  se 
constituerit  in  abstinentiae  tenore,  1  Cor.  9:  6.  Et  utique  receptior  apud  eccle&- 
ias  Epistola  Barnabae  illo  apocrypho  Pastore  moechorum.  Tertul.  de  Pudicitia, 
c.  20. 

2  See  ''  Introd.  to  Epistle  to  Hebrews,"  §  5. 

^  'O  KX'^firjvg  iv  t^  avatfioXoyrjfisvri  naqa  nuaiv  (eTrtO'ToA^,)  rjv  in  nqoa- 
tanov  rijg  'Pcufiaiav  itcxXrjaiag  xfj  Koqivd^loiV  diBivntavaxo,  xr^q  nqog'E^qal&vg 
noXXa  vo^fxata  nagad^slg,  ijdrj  ds  xoil  avtoXs^Ei  QTjToig  xnriv  i$  avtilg  XQW«~ 
fisvog  (TacpBortaxa  nagiaiijiny,  ox*  ftrj  viov  vnaqx^i  xo  av/ygafifjia.  Euseb. 
H.  E.  III.  38. 

4  See  "  Introd .  to  Ep.  to  the  Heb."  §  6. 


4>  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS.  79 

refused  to  restore  him  to  membership  in  the  church,  and  probably 
appealed  to  Hebrews  6:  4  etc.  in  justification  of  his  conduct. 
These  circumstances  may  well  account  for  the  enmity  of  Marcion 
against  this  book.  He  was  unwilling  it  should  pass  for  an  epistle  of 
Paul  ;  and  in  order  to  give  plausibility  to  his  opposition,  in  the 
minds  of  persons  resident  in  a  country  where  authentic  information 
was  circulated  relative  to  this  epistle  of  Paul :  which  was  directed 
to  Galatia,  in  the  vicinity  of  Pontus  ;  he  ascribed  the  epistle  to 
Barnabas,  the  colleague  of  Paul,  at  the  same  time  urging  the  circum- 
stance that  the  name  of  Paul  is  not  prefixed  to  it.  In  the  view 
of  Marcion,  this  epistle  lost  all  its  authority  by  being  regarded  as  a 
production  of  Barnabas  ;  for  Barnabas,  according  to  Galatians  2: 
13,  was  one  of  that  company  of  Peter,  which  temporised  with  the 
Jews,  he  was  one  of  those  protectoribus  Judaeismi,  who  were  so 
odious  to  Marcion.  From  Pontus  he  travelled  to  Rome:  and  if  he 
concealed  his  heretical  notions  for  a  time,  his  statement  that  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  a  production  of  Barnabas,  might  natu- 
rally have  been  credited  ;  as  he  had  come  from  the  country  to 
which  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  or  Galatian  Jewish  Christians,  was 
directed,  and  as  the  name  of  the  apostle  was  not  prefixed  to  it.  This 
opinion  of  Marcion,  notwithstanding  his  public  heresy,  might  still 
have  been  retained  in  the  Latin  church  ;  especially  as  several  other 
circumstances  were  calculated  to  cherish  it,  such  as  the  remark 
made  in  the  Greek  church,  that  its  style  differed  from  that  of  the 
other  epistles  of  Paul.  This  supposition  is  raised  to  probability  by 
a  fragment  of  the  author  of  an  ancient  anonymous  canon,  published 
by  Muratorius,  containing  these  words  :  "  fertur  etiam  ad  Laudicen- 
ses  (Laodicenses)  sc.  epistola,  aha  ad  Alexandrinos,  Pauli  nomine 
fictae,  ad  haeresin  Marcionis,"  i.  e.  there  is  also  an  epistle  to  the 
Laodiceans,  and  another  to  the  Alexandrians,  fabricated  under  the 
name  of  Paul,  in  order  to  support  the  heresy  of  Marcion.  The  Lat- 
in church  acknowledged  thirteen  epistles  of  Paul,  as  indisputably 
genuine ;  two  others,  namely  the  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans  and  that 
to  the  Hebrews,  they  commonly  regarded  as  spurious,  or  at  least  as  of 
doubtful  genuineness.^  Marcion  did  not  fabricate  an  epistle  to  the 
Laodiceans  ;  but  as  he  was  led  by  Coloss.  4:  16,  to  give  to  the 
epistle  to  the  Ephesians  the  name  of  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans  ;  the 
spurious  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans,  which  subsequently  appeared, 
was  by  mistake,  ascribed  to  him.^  The  case  was  probably  similar 
with  regard  to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  In  the  fragment  above 
cited,  the  words  "  epistola  ad  Alexandrinos"  are  perhaps  equivalent 
to  the  phrase  "  epistola  ad  Hebraeos  ;"  for  the  epistle  to  the  He- 

1  See  Hieronymus  de  viria  illustribusj  s.  v.  Paulus. 

2  Epiphan.  haeres.  42. 


80  GENUINENESS  OP  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

brews  was  written  in  Greek,  and  Jews  who  spoke  Greek  were  there- 
fore thought  of,  and  among  these  the  Alexandrians  were  the  most 
celebrated.  The  author  of  that  fragment  erroneously  ascribed  this 
epistle  to  the  Alexandrians  or  Hebrews  to  Marcion,  because  he  had 
given  to  it  the  new  superscription  "  Barnabae  titulus."  Although 
the  whole  epistle  is  directly  opposed  to  the  system  of  Marcion,  that 
great  enemy  of  Judaism ;  still  such  a  mistake  is  not  improbable  in 
a  man  who  was  as  little  acquainted  with  Marcion's  system,  as  with 
that  of  other  heretics  against  whom  he  contends,  and  who  was  op- 
posed to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  on  account  of  the  passage  ch. 
4 :  6  etc.  which  seemed  to  favour  the  rigid  discipline  of  the  Mon- 
tanists. 

Hug,  in  his  Introduction,  represents  and  explains  the  fact,  that 
the  Latin  church  denied  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  be  a  pro- 
duction of  Paul,  in  the  following  manner  : 

The  occidental  church  was  kept  actively  employed  by  the  Mon- 
tanists.  In  vindication  of  their  tenet,  that  those  guilty  of  grievous 
transgressions  should  be  irrevocably  cut  off  from  the  church,  they 
rehed  especially  on  Hebrews  6:  4,  5  ;  as  we  learn  from  Tertullian^ 
and  Jerome.^  And  hence,  the  ministers  of  the  Latin  church  made 
cautious  and  sparing  use  of  this  epistle.  Not  long  probably  after 
the  death  of  Irenaeus,  the  presbyter  Caius  assumed  the  tone  of 
clamorous  opposition  against  this  epistle,  in  a  work  which  he  pub- 
lished against  the  Montanists.^  And  from  that  time,  this  opinion 
was  adopted  by  the  greater  part  of  the  Latin  church.  Even  the 
Montanists  themselves  receded  from  their  original  position  on  this 
subject,  and  in  their  polemical  works,  received  this  epistle  only  as 
far  as  its  authority  was  acknowledged  by  their  opponents,  namely  as 
a  production  of  an  apostolical  teacher,  Barnabas  or  Clemens  etc.'* 
About  forty  years  after  Caius*  attack,  arose  the  Novatians,  who,  as 
we  learn  from  Jerome,  Augustine,  Epiphanius,  Theodoret  and 
others,  also  used  the  passage  Hebrews  6:  4,  5,  as  the  principal  de- 
fence of  their  tenets.  While  the  Greeks  were  calm  spectators  of 
the  contest,  and  evaded  the  argument  from  Heb.  vi.  by  their  inter- 
pretations ;  the  Latin  churches  were  led  by  the  pressure  of  circum- 
stances to  deny  the  authority  of  the  book,  whose  contents  they  were 
unable  to  refute.  But  the  Latin  churches  had  no  ecclesiastical 
tradition,  no  authority  of  earlier  churches,  to  which  they  could  ap- 
peal ;  the  whole  controversy  proceeded  on  the  ground  of  internal 
evidence.  It  was  for  this  reason,  that  Jerome  and  Augustine  could 
not  adopt  the  opinion  of  the  church  to  which  they  belonged  ;  be- 


J  De  Pudicitia,  cap.  20.  2  Adv.  Jovinian.  L,  II.  u.  3. 

3  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  20. 

*Tertullian  is  an  example.  De  Pudicitia,  c.  20. 


«5>  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS.  81 

cause  they  were  convinced  of  the  contrary  by  the  testimony  of  the 
ancients.  And  their  influence  tended  to  give,  at  a  subsequent  day, 
a  different  turn  to  the  opinion  of  the  Latin  church. 

II.  The  author  of  the  second  epistle  of  Peter  bears  witness,  that 
Paul  was  the  author  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

The  passage  2  Peter  3:  15,  "  As  our  beloved  brother  Paul 
also — hath  written  unto  you,"  is  best  explained  as  referring  to  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  sentiment  which  immediately  pre- 
cedes these  words,  and  concerning  which  the  reader  is  reminded  of 
what  Paul  had  written,  namely  :  "  And  account  that  the  long  suf- 
fering of  our  Lord  is  salvation,"^  is  no  where  expressly  found  ex- 
cept in  Hebrews  11:  39,  40.  The  patient  expectation  of  the  great 
change,  which  shall  occur  at  the  coming  of  our  Lord,  and  which  is 
spoken  of  in  2  Pet.  Ill,  is  no  where  so  pressingly  urged  as  in  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  10:  35  etc.  3:  6,  14.  12:  1—12.  Nor  is 
the  exhortation  to  godliness  any  where  so  expressly  connected  with 
the  promise  of  a  great  change,  which  heaven  and  earth  are  to  ex- 
perience,^ as  in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  12:  25 — 28,  which  ac- 
cording to  the  ancient  accounts,  was  ascribed  to  the  apostle  Paul. 
Why,  therefore,  should  we  have  recourse  to  the  forced  supposition, 
that  Paul  may  have  written  another  epistle  which  is  unknown  to  us, 
but  which  contained  a  discussion  of  this  subject? — As  to  the  gen- 
uineness of  this  text,  and  indeed  of  the  whole  epistle  of  Peter,  no 
valid  objection  can  be  urged.  The  text  has  a  multitude  of  concur- 
rent witnesses  in  its  favour,  and  the  genuineness  of  the  whole 
epistle  is  established  by  satisfactory  evidence.  But  even  if  this 
epistle  were  not  written  by  Peter,  it  must  have  been  published  as 
early  as  the  beginning  of  the  second  century  ;  so  that  on  this 
supposition,  it  proves  that  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  believed 
at  the  commencement  of  the  second  century,  to  be  an  epistle  of 
Paul  to  Asia  Minor. 

IV.  This  same  passage,  2  Pet.  3:  15,  affords  another  argument 
of  an  inferential  nature,  for  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  ;  as  it  accounts  for  some  circumstances  in  the  epistle  itself, 
which  might  be  otherwise  regarded  as  internal  objections  to  Paul's 
being  its  author. 

As  the  second  epistle  of  Peter  was  addressed  to  the  same  church- 


1  TrjVTOvyivQiov7jfiojv  fiayiQO&vfiiaVj  ovjtrjQlav  r^ysXad'e,  i.  e.  believe  that  the  de- 
lay of  our  Lord's  coming  will  enhance  our  salvation.  The  passage  in  Hebrews, 
to  which  Peter  is  supposed  to  refer  is  :  Kal  ovtoi  irdvrsg,  juaQTVQTjd'tVTSS  Sid 
^Tjs  TtiaTtojg,  ovx  exo/uiaavro  t7}v  £7rayyekiav  rov  ■d'sov  tuqI  Tjfj.ojv  xqitxrov  rt 
nQO^XexpafibVOv^'iva  fi7)  '/G(^U  ■ijTjim' TsXuujd'ojof  which  is  properly  rendered  thus  : 
but  all  these  did  not  receive  that  which  was  promised,  although  they  acquired  a 
good  report  by  their  faith  ;  for  God  intended  something  better  for  us,  namely 
that  they  should  not  attain  the  erown  before  us.     S. 

2  2  Pot.  3:  11. 

11 


82  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

es  as  the  first,  namely  to  those  in  Pontus,  Galatia,  Asia  and  Bithy- 
nia  ;  and  as  Peter  says  that  his  brother  Paul  wrote  also  to  them, 
vfi7v ;  it  follows  that  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  must  have  been  ad- 
dressed to  at  leas-t  one  of  the  churches  above  named :  the  word  vfiiv, 
2  Peter  3:  15,  does  not  necessarily  include  all  the  readers  of  these 
epistles  of  Peter. 

Now  the  most  probable  opinion  is,  that  it  was  addressed  to  the 
Hebrew  or  Jewish  Christians  in  Galatia.  And  if  the  epistle  to  the 
"  Hebrews"  or  Jewish  Christians  in  Galatia,  was  sent  with  that  to  the 
"  Galatians"  or  Gentile  Christians  in  Galatia ;  this  will  explain  why 
Paul,  contrary  to  his  general  custom,  wrote  an  epistle  exclusively 
for  the  Hebrew  members  of  a  church,  which  was  composed  of  both 
Jewish  and  Gentile  converts;  for  according  to  this  supposition,  each 
class  of  members  received  an  epistle  addressed  particularly  to  itself. 
The  same  supposition  will  also  account  for  Paul's  not  prefixing 
his  name  to  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  for  it  was  sent  together 
with  that  to  the  Galatians,  which  contained  his  name,  into  the  same 
section  of  the  country  and  to  the  same  churches.  The  general 
scope  of  both  epistles  points  to  Jewish  persecutors,  and  Judaizing 
false  teachers  ;  both  treat  of  persecution  and  of  Jewish  seducers. 
Gal.  1:  7—9.  4:  17.  comp.  Heb.  13:  9.  12:  15  etc.— Gal.  3:  4. 
4:  29.  comp.  Heb.  10:  32  etc.  12:  1—4.  13:  13.  See  the  Intro- 
duction to  Storr*s  Comm.  on  the  Hebrews,  p.  LVIII — LXIX. 
The  similarity  of  ideas  in  the  IH.  and  IV.  chapters  of  the  epistle  to 
the  Galatians  with  those  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  is  illustrated 
in  the  "  Programma  de  Consensu  epistolarum  Pauli  ad  Hebraeos  et 
Galatas,  p.  7 — 16.  A  remarkable  fact,  in  confirmation  of  the 
opinion  that  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians  and  that  to  the  Hebrews 
belong  together,  is  found  in  the  division  of  the  most  ancient  Vatican 
manuscript  of  the  New  Testament,  Cod.  1209.  In  this  manuscript, 
all  the  sections  of  the  epistles  of  Paul  are  numbered.  The  last 
section  of  the  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  is  numbered  LIX  ;  and  the 
sections  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  are  marked  with  the  next 
succeeding  numbers,  LX — LXX  ;  although  in  that  manuscript,  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  does  not  follow  immediately  after  that  to  the 
Galatians,  but  is  placed  last.  Now  the  person  who  made  that 
transcript,  must  have  found  those  numbers  in  the  manuscript  from 
which  he  copied  ;  for  if  he  had  made  them  himself,  he  would  have 
placed  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  next  to  that  to  the  Galatians,  (as 
it  comes  next  in  the  order  of  the  numbers),  and  would  not  have 
placed  there  the  epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  which  begins  with  LXX. 
y.  The  contents  and  style  of  this  epistle,  not  only  contain  no 
evidence  against  its  genuineness,  but  really  afford  some  proof  that 
it  is  a  production  of  Paul. 

1.  The  salutation  from  the  Jewish  Christians  who  had  been  driv- 


^  3.]  ANTILEGOMENA— EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS.  83 

en  out  of  Italy,  Heb.  13:  24,  and  the  mention  of  Timothy  as  his 
fellov^  traveller,  13:  23,  are  very  applicable  to  Paul. — Many  have 
supposed  that  the  words,  vno  tmv  dxovadi'TCDv  eig  i^fiug  i^f/Sacwitfj^ 
[was  confirmed  unto  us  by  them  that  heard  him],  seem  to  point  out 
the  writer  as  a  disciple  of  the  apostles  ;  but  his  using  the  first  per- 
son rjficig^  instead  of  the  second,  may  well  be  considered  an  instance 
of  that  very  common  figure  of  speech  called  dt'ocitoh(o<fig^  i,  e.  com- 
munication. 

2.  Not  only  does  the  general  scope  of  this  epistle  tend  to  the 
same  point,  on  which  Paul  lays  so  much  stress  in  his  other  epistles, 
namely  that  we  are  justified  and  obtain  salvation  only  through  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  the  Mosaic  institutions  cannot  effect  this  object ; 
but  there  are  also  various  propositions  in  this  epistle,  which  are 
found  in  the  other  writinsfs  of  Paul.^  And  Berber,  in  his  Disserta- 
tion  entitled  "The  epistle  to  the  Hebiows,  a  homily,"  finds  so  great 
a  similarity  between  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  Paul's  dis- 
course, x4.cts  13;  16 — 41,  that  he  believes  this  discourse  might  be 
regarded  as  an  extract  from  that  epistle,  or  vice  versa,  that  epistle 
a  commentary  on  this  discourse. 

3.  Warmth  and  energy  of  expression  characterise  this  epistle,  as 
they  do  the  undisputed  productions  of  Paul.  Hebraisms  of  every 
kind  abound  in  it,  as  in  his  other  epistles.  And  finally,  it  contains 
particular  expressions,  phrases  and  collocations  of  words,  which  are 
either  peculiar  to  Paul,  or  are  most  frequent  in  his  writings. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  reasoning  in  this  epistle,  is  developed  with 
much  more  circumspection  and  minuteness,  than  is  usual  in  the 
other  epistles  of  Paul.  But  why  should  this  be  an  objection  to  its 
Pauline  origin,  when  the  writer  himself  informs  us,  5:  11  etc.  that 
he  aimed  to  develop  every  thing  with  clearness. 

III.  7.  Vieios  of  the  evidence  which  evinces  the  genuineness  of 
the  other  disputed  books,  namely  the  second  and  third  epistles  of 
John,  the  second  epistle  of  Peter,  the  epistle  of  James  and  that 
of  Jude. 

General  remarks. 

The  following  works  contain  general  remarks  on  the  antilego- 
mena,  and  on  the  circumstances  which  occasioned  doubts  concern- 
ing them  :  Weber's  "  Contributions  to  the  history  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament canon ;"  Hanlein's  "  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament ;" 
and  Griesinger's  "  Introd.  to  the  books  of  the  New  Covenant." 
The  result  of  their  inquiries  is,  that  various  accidental  causes  may 

1  See  Hug,  p.  312 — 315,  and  Meyer's  "  Representation  of  the  doctrines  of 
Paul,"  p.  310  etc.  Altonae,  1801. 


84  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

be  assigned,  which  either  actually  did  occasion,  or  at  least  might 
have  occasioned  the  doubts  which  existed  concerning  these  books, 
without  diminishing  at  all  our  conviction  of  their  genuineness.  Not 
one  of  these  books  can  be  proved  to  be  spurious.  And  when  all 
the  evidence  for  and  against  these  books,  both  internal  and  exter- 
nal, is  fairly  weighed,  the  preponderance  is  always  in  their  favor. 

Partieuhkr  remarkK  on  the  genuineness  of  each  book. 

I.  The  second  epistle  of  Peter.  This  book  was  the  first  placed 
among  the  disputed  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  by  Origen.* 
It  is  natural  to  suppose,  that  if,  from  incidental  causes,  the  second 
epistle  of  Peter  did  not  become  known  as  early  as  the  first ;  some 
churches,  which  for  a  length  of  time  had  been  accustomed  to  read 
but  one  epistle  of  Peter,  might  hesitate  to  receive  another.  Suspi- 
cion might  also  have  arisen  against  the  genuineness  of  this  epistle, 
from  the  fact  that  it  was  brought  from  Asia  Minor,  the  abode  of  the 
Montanists,  who  were  accused^  of  a  disposition  to  fabricate  new 
writings ;  more  especially  may  this  have  been  the  case,  as  the  pas- 
sage 2  Pet.  2:  20,  could  be  urged  in  vindication  of  the  rigor  of  the 
Montanistic  discipline.  Or  the  departure  of  the  Christians  in  Asia 
Minor  from  the  customary  method  of  celebrating  the  Easter  solem- 
nities, may  have  produced  in  the  eastern  and  western  Christians  an 
indisposition  to  receive  this  book.^ 

The  genuineness  of  the  second  epistle  of  Peter  is  vindicated  in 
the  following  works :  Nietzsche :  Epistola  Petri  posterior  auctori  suo 
imprimis  contra  Grotium  vindicata  atque  asserta.  Lipsiae,  1785. 
Morus  :  Praelectiones  in  Jacobi  et  Petri  epistoIas,p.  214  etc.  Pott : 
Epist.  calhol.  Vol.  II.  p.  163  etc.  Commentatio,  qua  genuina 
secundae  Petri  epistolae  origo  denuo  defenditur.  Tiib.  1806.  Dahl : 
Commentatio  exegetico-critica  de  avx^eviia  epistolarum  Petrinae 
posterioris  atque  Judae.  Rostoch.  1807.  sect.  I — V.  and  Hug's  In- 
troduction, pt.  II.  p.  391  etc. 

IF.  The  second  and  third  epistles  of  John.  A  striking  similarity 
exists  between  these  and  the  first  epistle  of  John.  And  the  third 
epistle,  which  is  addressed  to  Gains,  expressly  refers  (v.  9)  to  a 
communication  addressed  to  the  church  of  which  Gaius  was  a  mem- 
ber. Both  these  epistles  were,  doubtless,  mere  addresses,  sent  to 
two  members  of  different  churches,  along  with  his  Gospel  and  first 
epistle,  which  they  were  to  publish  in  their  respective  churches. 
Now  if,  as  may  be  supposed,  the  Gospel  and  first  epistle  of  John 
were  sent  to  various  other  churches,  unaccompanied  by  these  two 
addresses  to  individual  persons  ;  this  will  show  why  the  two  smaller 

1  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  25.  2  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  20. 

3  See  "  Introd.  to  Epistle  lo  the  Hebrews,"  §  10. 


<5>  3,]  ANTILEGOMENA— EPISTLE  OF  JAMES.  85 

epistles  were  wanting  in  some  transcripts,  and  also  account  for 
doubts  being  entertained  of  their  genuineness,  in  places  where  they 
were  unknown  until  a  later  date.  But  it  is  evident  from  Irenaeus,^ 
that  in  sonne  copies,  one  or  other  of  the  smaller  epistles  was  con- 
nected with  the  larger  one  ;  for  that  writer  quotes  passages  from 
both  the  first  and  second  epistles,  as  if  taken  from  one  and  the  same 
epistle.  See  "  On  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  History  and  Epistles  of 
John,"  Hug's  Introduction,  and  Eichhorn's  Introd.  to  N.  Test. 

III.  The  epistle  of  James.  The  great  antiquity  of  this  epistle  is 
evinced  by  the  following  considerations: — first,  it  was  received,  with 
the  homologoumena,  into  the  old  Syriac  version  : — Secondly,  ideas 
and  phrases  are  borrowed  from  it  by  Hermas  in  his  Pastor,  as  has 
been  proved  by  Semler.  The  high  antiquity  of  Pastor,  may  be 
inferred  from  the  declaration  of  Eusebius,  that  it  was  regarded  as 
the  production  of  the  Hermas  mentioned  Rom.  16:  14,  and  was 
used  by  some  of  the  most  ancient  writers,  xoivnuXaLOTutrnv  avyy^a- 
ifio)v.  He  himself  mentions  the  Pastor  of  Hermas  immediately  af- 
ter the  writings  of  the  apostles,  and  before  those  of  Justin  and  Igna- 
tius : — And  thirdly,  reference  is  had  to  this  epistle  even  in  the  first 
epistle  of  Peter.  It  is  probable  from  several  passages,  that  either 
James  had  the  first  epistle  of  Peter  before  him,  or  Peter  that  of 
James.  Compare  James  4:  10,  with  1  Pet.  5:  6,  James  1:  2 — 4 
with  I  Pet.  1:  6,  7.  James  1:  18—21,  with  1  Pet.  1:  3,  21,  22. 
2:  1,  2.  This  laecomes  the  more  probable,  if  both  epistles  were 
directed  to  the  same  churches,  as  may  be  supposed  from  the  fact 
that  both  were  directed  to  the  dcaanoga,  or  "  dispersed,"  James 
1:  1.  1  Pet.  1:  1;  and  especially  if,  as  is  probable,  the  passage 
James  4:  5  is  borrowed  from  Paul's  epistle  to  the  Galatians  (V.  17, 
19 — 21,)  a  body  of  people  who  are  expressly  mentioned  in  the  ad- 
dress of  the  first  epistle  of  Peter.  Now  if  one  did  borrow  from  the 
other,  it  is  probable  that  James  was  the  earlier  writer.  For,  it  is 
admitted  that  he  died  several  years  before  Peter ;  and  Peter  proba- 
bly wrote  his  second  epistle  shortly  after  the  first,  (as  may  be  infer- 
red from  the  word  r^d^]  now,  or  so  soon  2  Pet.  3:  1,)  and  conse- 
quently wrote  both  not  long  before  his  death,  2  Pet.  1:  14.  In  re- 
gard, however,  to  James  4:  10,  the  context  renders  it  probable,  that 
James  had  Job  22:  29,  and  not  the  first  epistle  of  Peter,  in  view. 

That  this  epistle  was  written  by  James  the  son  of  Alpheus,  call- 
ed James  the  younger,  is  proved  in  the  Dissertation  on  the  epistle 
of  James,  in  Opuscula  Academica,  by  the  following  internal  argu- 
ments : 

1.  The  epistle  of  James  presupposes  an  acquaintance,  not  only 
with  Paul's  doctrine  of  dixaiotoig  (justification),  but  also  with  the 

1  Contr.  Hacr.  Lib.  3.  cap.  16.  §  5.  8. 


86  .  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.   I. 

epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians.  But  this  cannot  apply  to 
the  older  James,  the  brother  of  John ;  for  he  had  long  before  been 
put  to  death  by  Herod,  Acts  12:  2. 

2.  Such  an  acquaintance  with  the  doctrines  of  Paul,  is  perfectly 
applicable  to  the  James,  whom  Paul  saw  twice  at  Jerusalem  (Gal. 
1:  19.  2:  9.),  who  delivered  the  address  to  the  christian  assembly 
at  Jerusalem  (Acts  15:  13  etc.),  and  probably  also  wrote  the  letter 
mentioned  in  the  subsequent  verses,  22  etc.  This  James  is  called 
(Gal.  1:  19)  ddikapog  avglov^  "the  Lord's  brother:"  and  not  only  is 
he  placed  on  an  equality  with  the  apostles,  (Gal.  2:  9,  *Jdx(f}§og  xat 
Kricfdg  xal  Vtwai/f?;?,  ol  doxovpreg  aivXot  elvuv^  "  James  and  Cephas 
and  John  who  seemed  to  be  pillars,")  but  he  is  expressly  spoken  of 
as  belonging  to  the  number  of  the  apostles,  Gal.  1:  19.  Acts  9:  27. 

IV.  The  epistle  of  Jade,  This  epistle  was  expressly  ascribed 
to  Jude  by  Tertullian,^  in  these  words  :  (scriptura)  Enoch  apud  Ju- 
dam  Apostolum  testimonium  possidet,i.  e.  the  (apocryphal  book)  of 
Enoch  has  the  testimony  of  the  apostle  Jude  in  its  favour  ;  and  also 
by  Origen,  in  his  work  De  principiis.^ 

Inrerential  proof  ia  favour  of  2  Peter  and  James. 

The  epistle  of  Jude,  which  was  used  by  the  author  of  the  book 
of  Enoch,  (a  spurious  work,  which  according  to  the  testimony  of  an- 
cient writers^  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Christians  as  early  as  the  sec- 
ond century  and  beginning  of  the  third,)  confirms  the  early  existence 
of  the  second  epistle  of  Peter,  and  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle  of 
James.  That  the  epistle  of  Jude  was  used  by  the  author  of  the 
book  of  Enoch,  needs  no  proof.  It  has  been  shown'*  that  the  fabri- 
cation of  this  book  was  occasioned  by  the  epistle  of  Jude.  In  the 
few  fragments  of  it,  preserved  by  Fabricius  in  his  Pseudepigrapha 
N.  T.  there  are  traces  of  its  being  derived  from  a  Christian.  It 
contains  a  circumstantial  account  of  the  fall  of  the  wicked  angels, 
framed  in  accordance  with  the  Alexandrian  version  of  Gen.  6:  2 ; 
but  why  this  should  be  introduced  in  a  history  of  Enoch,  cannot  be 
accounted  for,  except  by  the  supposition  that  the  author  was  led  to 
it  by  the  sixth  verse  of  Jude,  and  so  must  have  had  this  epistle  be- 
fore him.^ 

The  writer  of  the  epistle  of  Jude  copied  from  the  second  of  Pe- 
ter, which  proves  the  antiquity  of  that  book.     A  comparison  of  Jude, 

1  De  Habitu  muliebri,  c.  3.  2  Lib.  III.  c.  2.  §  1. 

3  See  the  Dissertation  do  catholicaruin  epistolarum  occasiono  et  consilio,  p.  34. 

4  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  p.  39  etc. 

5  On  the  subject  of  the  book  of  Enoch,  see  Vogel,  in  Gabler's  Theological 
Journal  for  1803,  p.  320  etc.  Hug,  p.  401  etc.  and  on  the  passage  Jude  v.  14 
etc.  See  HSLnlein  :  £pistola  Judse  Graece,  commentario  critico  et  annotatione 
perpetua  iilustrata.  Ed.  2.  Erlang.  1805.  p.  148  etc. 


^  3.]  ANtlLEGOMENA EPISTLE  OF  JUDE.  87 

V.  4  etc.  with  2  Pet.  2:  1  etc.  renders  it  very  highly  probable,  that 
the  author  of  one  of  these  epistles  had  the  other  epistle  before  him. 
Now  Jude  first  presents  to  his  hearers,  (v.  5,)  the  ancient  people 
of  God,  the  people  of  Israel,  as  an  example  for  their  warning  ;  and 
then  afterwards,  contrary  to  the  order  of  times,  comes  to  the  exam- 
ples of  the  fallen  angels  (v.  6,)  and  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  (v.  7.) 
In  the  same  manner,  Peter,  in  the  parallel  passage,  2  Pet.  2:  1, 
commences  with  the  words :  "  there  were  false  prophets  among  the 
people,"  and  afterwards  brings  in  the  example  of  the  fallen  angels, 
and  of  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  (v.  4  etc).  And 
Peter  had  a  natural  inducement,  in  the  context,  to  make  a  transi- 
tion to  the  false  prophets  among  the  people  of  Israel,  because  he 
had  immediately  before,  in  1:  19 — 21,  spoken  of  the  true  prophets 
of  the  Jewish  nation.  But  on  the  contrary,  in  the  epistle  of  Jude, 
no  reason  can  be  discovered  for  reversing  the  order  of  time  and 
commencing  with  the  people  of  Israel.  There  is  therefore  reason 
to  believe,  that  Jude  was  led  to  adopt  this  order  by  having  his  eye 
on  the  first  epistle  of  Peter ;  and  not  that  the  latter  copied  it  from 
the  former.  The  object  of  Jude's  epistle  probably  was,  by  a  repe- 
tition of  the  admonitions  contained  in  the  second  epistle  of  Peter,  to 
impress  more  deeply  upon  the  readers  of  that  epistle,  the  dying  ex- 
hortation of  Peter  himself,  2  Pet.  1:  14,  15.  In  the  "  Commenta- 
tio,  qua  genuina  secundae  Petri  epistolae  origo  defenditur,''  and  espe- 
cially inDahl's  Comment,  de  av^evxiq.  epistolae  II  Petri  atque  Judae, 
is  a  discussion  of  the  evidence  arising  from  a  comparison  of  the  par- 
allel passages  in  second  Peter  and  Jude,  and  particularly  from  the 
greater  perspicuity  of  Jude's  language,  in  favour  of  the  position  that 
the  author  of  Jude's  epistle  had  the  second  epistle  of  Peter  before 
him.  The  contrary  opinion  is  advocated  by  Hug,  in  his  Introduc- 
tion. 

The  epistle  of  Jude  confirms  the  genuineness  of  James'  epistle. 
By  subjoining  to  his  name  (Jude,  v.  1.)  (xS€Xq)6g*/ax(o^ov,  "the 
brother  of  James,"  he  probably  intended  to  call  the  attention  of  his 
readers  to  the  epistle  which  they  had  received  from  his  brother 
James,  who  was  now  no  more.  For  since  his  readers  must  have 
known  from  whom  they  had  received  this  epistle,  it  cannot  well  be 
supposed  that  he  added  these  words  merely  to  make  himself  known 
to  them,  or  to  distinguish  himself  from  others  of  the  same  name. — 
The  epistles  of  James  and  Jude  must  have  been  addressed  to  the 
same  persons  ;  if  both  were  intended  for  the  readers  of  the  epistles 
of  Peter:  vide  III  and  IV,  in  this  illustration. 


PART    II. 


'THE    INTEGRITY    Or    THE    BOOKS    OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT. 

SECTION    IV. 

That  the  writings,  whose  genuineness  has  been  proved  in  §  2, 
3,  have  been  transmitted  to  us  without  any  alteration  prejudicial 
to  their  integrity ;  is  proved  by  the  exact  coincidence  of  our  text 
with  all  the  transcripts  which  men  have  been  able  to  collect  of 
all  ages  and  countries,  with  the  many  and  large  extracts  from  the 
New  Testament  found  in  the  writings  of  the  christian  Fathers,  with 
the  Commentaries  on  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  and  finally 
with  the  different  translations  which  have  been  made  of  the  New 
Testament.(l)  The  various  readings  of  the  New  Testament  text, 
are  so  far  from  invalidating  these  proofs,  that  they  actually  corrobo- 
rate them. (2)  Nor  have  we  any  reason  to  fear,  that  some  of  the 
books  may  have  reached  us  only  through  the  medium  of  a  Greek 
translation,  which  is  materially  diverse  from  the  original  text.  For 
the  hypothesis,  that  the  Gospel  of  Mark  was  originally  written  in 
Latin,  is  a  figment  of  later  date. (3)  The  conjecture,  that  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew,  is  indeed 
more  ancient,  but  unfounded. (4)  But  that  Matthew  wrote  his 
Gospel  in  Hebrew,  cannot  be  denied. (5)  Yet  the  accuracy  and 
the  great  antiquity  of  the  Greek  version  of  Matthew  which  we  pos- 
sess, are  probable  even  from  internal  proofs  ;  (6)  and  are  rendered 
certain  by  the  exact  coincidence  of  all  the  transcripts,  and  all  the 
quotations  found  in  the  Fathers,  and  all  the  versions  of  Matthew 
with  our  text.(7) 

Illustration  1. 

Our  present  text  is  the  same  as  that  which  Marcion  found  in  use 
in  the  catholic  church. 

The  whole  arrangement  of  Marcion's  Gospel,  proves  that  he 
found  in  the  christian  church,  no  other  text  than  our  present  one. 


^  4.]  MAaeiON VARIOUS  READINGS,  89 

and  that  he  himself  fabricated  another.  This  is  also  evident  from 
his  complaint,  that  the  Gospel  which  he  found  in  use  had  been 
adulterated  by  the  enemies  of  Judaism,  in  order  to  make  it  harmo- 
nize with  the  law  and  the  prophets :  for  he  does  not  substantiate 
his  charge,  by  alleging  that  another  Gospel  different  from  the  cath- 
olic one  existed  ;  but  he  appeals  to  a  passage  in  the  epistle  to  the 
Galatians  (chap.  II.),  which  he  evidently  misunderstood,  and  inter- 
preted not  as  guided  by  the  love  of  truth,  but  by  devotion  to  his 
system.     Vide  §  2.  UL  8. 

III.  2,   The  various  readings  confirm  the  integrity  of  our  text. 

The  diversity  in  the  various  readings  of  the  New  Testament, 
proves  that  the  copies  of  the  New  Testament  hooks  which  were 
used  by  ancient  writers,  translators  and  expositors,  as  well  as  those 
used  in  the  present  day,  were  derived  from  different  sources.  W« 
have  therefore  in  these  various  readings,  the  testimony  of  a  multi- 
tude of  separate  and  unconnected  witnesses  in  favour  of  the  sub- 
stantial correctness  of  our  text :  for  as  to  this,  all  the  manuscripts, 
commentaries,  versions  and  citations  are  in  agreement. 

Schmidt,  in  his  Introd.  to  the  New  Test.  {%  170 — 177,)  has,  by 
evidence  drawn  from  the  history  of  the  ancient  controversies  be- 
tween the  catholic  church  and  her  enemies,  put  to  rest  the  suspicion 
that  the  New  Testament  text  may  have  suffered  much  injury  du- 
ring the  early  ages  of  the  church.  The  different  sources  from 
which  the  various  readings  sprung,  are  stated  in  the  same  work, 
§181  etc. — On  the  Integrity  of  the  New  Test,  see  Kleuker,  pt. 
III.  Vol.  I.  p.  471 — 495.  Hanlein,  pt.  I.  p.  225-— 240.  Schmidt's 
Introd.  pt.  II.  p.  32  etc. 

III.  3.   We  have  the   Original  of  Mark,  and  not  merely  a  trans- 
lation of  it. 

It  was  a  vague  report  that  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel  at  Rome, 
which  gave  occasion  to  the  erroneous  opinion,  that  his  book  was  in- 
tended for  Romans,  and  therefore  written  in  Latin,  The  Latin- 
isms  of  Mark  can  afford  no  support  to  this  conjecture  ;  as  the  Ro- 
mans naturally  brought  with  them  many  Latin  expressions  into 
Syria  and  Palestine. 

III.  4.   The  conjecture  that  there  was  a  Hebrew  original  of  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  though  ancient,  is  unfounded. 

Clemens  of  Alexandria  is  the  oldest  know^n  writer,  who  advanced, 
according  to  Eusebius,'  the  hypothesis  that  the  epistle  to  the  He- 

1  Eccl.  Hist.  VI.  14. 
12 


so  INTKGaiTY  eF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [b^.  U 

brews  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew.  But  Clemens  does  not 
represent  this  hypothesis  as  a  fact  supported  by  history.  On  the 
contrary,  it  undoubtedly  originated  from  the  ungrounded  opinion 
that  the  style  of  this  epistle  is  widely  different  from  that  of  the 
other  writings  of  Paul.  Origen  paid  not  the  least  respect  to  this 
conjecture  of  his  instructor  Clemens.  But  as  Clemens  adduces 
tlie  superscription  ngog' E^galovg  (to  the  Hebrews),  as  one  ground 
of  his  supposition  ;  the  question  arises,  whether  'E^guioi  (Hebrews) 
necessarily  signifies  Jews  whose  vernacular  tongue  w^as  the  Hebrew  : 
for  if  it  does,  it  affords  an  argument  which  is  not  without  some 
weight. — Yet  Paul  might  have  written  in  Greek,  even  to  Jews  who 
spoke  Hebrew. — But,  according  to  the  idiom  of  that  day,  the  word 
'E§(mlog  was  not  confined  to  Jews  who  spake  Hebrew,  (as  Hug  has 
maintained,^)  but  denoted  a  circumcised  Jew,  in  opposition  to  'EkXi- 
vior>;5.  Paul  in  his  second  epistle  to  the  Cor.  11:  22,  denominates 
fiimseM' JS^Qulog  (a  Hebrew),  although  he  was  a  native  of  Asia  Mi- 
nor ;  and  he  even  makes  a  distinction  between  ^E^gaiog  and  'Joga>jk- 
iirig  (Israelite)  one  born  of  a  Jew.  Indeed  Clemens  himself^  ex- 
tends the  signification  of  the  word  'E^galoL  so  far  as  to  embrace  all 
who  enjoyed  the  benefits  of  divine  revelation. 

Pantaenus,  who  was  the  teacher  of  Clemens,  and  to  whom  Cle- 
mens appeals,^  did  not  probably  infer  that  this  epistle  was  addressed 
to  Jews  in  Palestine,  from  its  superscription  -ngog  'E^galovg^  but 
from  several  misinterpreted  passages  of  the  Epistle  itself,  (cap.  I. 
2.  II.  13.  XII.  25,)  from  which  he  concluded,  that  the  readers  of 
this  epistle  were  such  Christians  as  had  enjoyed  the  personal  instruc- 
tion of  Christ. 

The  language  of  the  epistle  itself,  especially  the  indefiniteness  of 
certain  Greek  terms,  (such  as  dcuxfrjxr]  for  covenant,  9:  15),  and 
the  citations  from  the  Old  Testament,  are  evidence  in  favor  of  a 
Greek  original. 

III.  5.    Matthew^s  Gospel  originally  written  in  Hebrem, 

Papias,  Irenaeus,  and  Origen,  all  testify  that  Matthew  wrote  his 
Gospel  in  Hebrew.  Papias  uses  these  words  i"^  IMutx^ulog  'E^gu'l'dt- 
dtaXfHTM  T«  Koytu  avvtygaximio^  i.  e.  Matthew  wrote  his  gospel  in 
the  Hebrew  language.  This  information  Papias  probably  derived 
from  one  or  the  other  of  his  two  friends  in  Palestine,  Aristion  and 
John  the  Presbyter,  whom  Eusebius  denominates  {^luOrjTag  '^vgiov) 
"  Disciples  of  the  Lord."     Irenaeus,  speaking  of  the  four  Gospels, 

1  Introduction,  pt.  II.  §  141,  etc.  Andover  ed.  2  Strom.  L.  I.  c.  5. 

3  Eugab.  H.  E.  VI.  14.  4  Euseb.  H.  E.  III.  39. 


^  4*]       -  EPISTLE  TO  HEBREWS  ORIGINALITY  GREEK.  91 

says:  MaixfaTos  li/  To7g'£^gaioig^  tri  Idla  aviMv  dialtKiM  yQuq>^v 
i^rjve/xev  evayyski'ov  i.  e.  Matthew,  among  the  Hebrews,  wrote  a 
Gospel  in  their  own  language.^  He  also  asserts,^  that  the  Ebion- 
ites — (whose  country  was  Palestine) — used  only  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew.  It  is  not  easy  to  assign  a  reason  why  the  Jewish  Chris- 
tians of  Palestine  used  only  Matthew's  Gospel,  and  not  also  that  of 
Mark,  which  was  published  very  early  and  under  the  authority  of 
Peter,  the  great  apostle  of  the  Jews ;  unless  it  be  admitted,  that 
Matthew's  gospel  and  that  only  was  written  in  their  native  tongue, 
Origen^  appeals  to  tradition  {nagcxdotjig),  for  proof  that  the  gospel  of 
Matthew  was  written  in  Hebrew  ^E^gdinolg  yga^tfAaoi  avvxeTuy^tvov. 

According  to  the  testimony  of  Eusebius,'*  Pantaenus  found  the 
Hebrew  gospel  of  Matthew  in  India  (Arabia  Felix),  which  had 
been  brought  thither  by  the  Apostle  Bartholomew. 

Jerome^  asserts,  that  the  Gospel  of  the  Nazarenes  which  he  tran- 
scribed, was  ipsum  hebraicum  Matthaei,  i.  e.  the  Hebrew  itself  of 
Matthew.     See  §  2.  111.  4. 

The  Hebrew  character  of  Matthew's  autograph  is  vindicated  in 
the  following  works,  Hanlein's  Introduction  to  N.  Test.  pt.  II.  No. 
2.  p.  313—339.  Eichhorn's  Introd.  Part.  I.  p.  461—489.  (on 
the  proof  derived  from  the  supposed  errors  of  the  Greek  translation, 
as  discussed  in  p.  477 — 489  of  Eichhorn's  Introd. — see  the  re- 
marks of  the  Reviewer,  in  the  Haller  Litt.  Zeitung,  for  1805,  p.  371 
— ^377).  Schmidt's  Introd.  pt.  I.  p.  30— 35.  pt.  II.  preface  p.  IV— 
VI.  Feilmoser's  Introd.  to  N.  T.  p.  23 — 46.  Hug,  on  the  contrary, 
maintains  that  Matthew  was  originally  written  in  Greek,  Introd.  pt. 
II.  p.  342,  Andover  ed.  and  also  Schubert,  in  his  Dissert,  critico- 
exegetica,  qua  in  sermonera,  quo  in  evangelium  Matthaei  conscriptum 
fuerit,  inquiritur.  Gotting.  1809. 

III.  6.    Internal  evidence  for  the  Integrity  of  the  Gospels. 

In  our  Greek  text  of  Matthew,  we  may  observe  a  certain  regular 
coincidence  with  Mark's  Gospel,  and  a  uniformity  of  plan,  which 
would  doubtless  have  been  destroyed,  if  subsequent  interpolations  or 
alterations  had  been  made.^ 

By  similar  internal  evidence,  the  integrity  of  the  Gospels  of 
Mark  and  John  is  established.  In  John's  Gospel,  the  harmonious 
coincidence  of  the  individual  parts  with  the  object  of  the  apostle, 
(which  was  to  confute  the  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  and  the  Ce- 


1  Euseb.  H.  E.  V.8. 

2  Adv.  Haeres.  Lib.  I.  c.  26.  §  2.  III.  c.  11.  §  7. 

3  In  Euaeb.  H.  E.  VI.  25.  4  Hist.  Eccles.  V.  10. 

5  De  Viris  Illust.  s.  v.  Matthaeus. 

6  See  "  On  the  Object  of  John's  gospel,"  §  07,  G4. 


92  INTEGRITY  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I- 

rinthians),  speaks  for  its  integrity.^ — And  that  Mark's  Gospel  has 
reached  us  unadulterated,  is  proved  by  the  exact  coincidence  of  its 
present  text  with  the  plan  which  Luke  drew  from  it. 

IlLt.  7.    Faithfulness  of  the  Greek  translator  of  Matthew, 

As  our  Greek  text  was  the  basis  of  all  the  versions  of  Matthew 
which  have  come  to  our  knowledge,  and  as  all  the  Fathers  of  the 
church  used  this  text ;  we  are  authorised,  by  the  great  estimation 
in  which  this  version  was  held,  to  believe  that  it  possessed  superior 
excellence,  and  was  most  laithful  to  the  original.  John  undoubt- 
edly supposed  his  readers  to  be  familiar  with  our  Greek  translation 
of  Matthew.^ 

1  See  "  On  the  Object  of  John's  gospel,"  p.  221. 

2  Compare  Hall.  Litt.  zeit.  for  1810.  No.  332. 


PART   III. 


CREDIBILITY    OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT. 

SECTION    V. 

Historical  credibility  of  the  narrations  contained  in  the  JVew 
Testament. 

As  the  intelligence  concerning  Jesus  and  his  messengers,  which  is 
contained  in  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  is  (accord- 
ing to  §  2,  4,)  derived  from  Matthew,  John,  Mark  and  Luke,  it 
must  possess  the  highest  degree  of  credibility.  For  these  witnesses 
lacked  neither  the  means  of  knowing  the  truth,(l)  nor  motives  to 
communicate  it.  Matthew  and  John  were  apostles  and  confidents 
of  Jesus :  Mark  was  under  the  influence  of  the  apostles,  especially 
of  Peter  ;(2)  and  Luke  was  an  eye-witness  of  part  of  the  history  of 
the  apostle  Paul,  who  was  his  teacher.  Sustaining  to  him  so  inti- 
mate a  relation,  he  could  easily  obtain  from  this  apostle  information 
relative  to  the  earlier  incidents  of  his  life  :  he  was  Hkewise  his  com- 
panion during  his  residence  in  Palestine,  where  he  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  become  intimately  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the  oth- 
er apostles  and  of  Jesus. (3)  f 

That  the  authors  of  the  Gospels  and  of  the  Acts  of  the  'apostles, 
did  not  practise  intentional  deception  ;  that,  on  the  contrary,  they 
composed  their  narratives  with  the  utmost  historical  fidelity ;  is  evi- 
dent from  the  general  character  and  appearance  of  their  narrations, 
(4)  as  well  as  from  the  nature  of  the  incidents  which  they  relate. 
For  these  incidents  were  of  such  a  nature  that  their  truth  necessa- 
rily must  (5)  and  easily  could  (6)  be  investigated.  Every  false 
statement,  therefore,  would  have  been  exposed  to  public  reprehen- 
sion, if  it  had  been  possible  to  find  any  such  in  their  books.  (7) 

Illustration  1. 
Competence  of  the  witnesses. 

That  the  evangelists  had  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  facts 
which  they  relate,  may  be  evinced  from  the  contents  of  the  Gos- 


94  CREDIBILITY  Of  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.   I. 

pels  themselves  ;  as  Tollner  has  proved,  in  his  work  entitled,   "  A 
universal  proof  of  the  truth  of  the  christian  religion."^ 

III.  2.    Peter^s  participation  in  the  composition  of  Mark^s 
Gospel. 

Origen  asserts,^  that  information  of  most  undoubted  certainty  had 
been  handed  down  to  his  time,  that  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel  as  Pe- 
ter dictated  it  to  him  {cog  IltiQO?  vcfi^yriauTO  avKo).  And  he  says 
not  one  word  of  the  singular  opinion,  which  was  even  then  in  circu- 
lation, that  Mark's  Gospel  contained  selections  from  the  sermons 
of  Peter. — It  has  been  already  remarked  (§  2.  Illust.  5.),  that  Justin 
quotes  the  Gospel  of  Mark  under  the  title  of  dnofii/ijfiovsvf^aza 
Uttgov,^  memorabilia  of  Peter.  Doubtless  he  received  an  ac- 
count of  Peter's  concern  with  this  Gospel,  from  Palestine,  the  land 
of  his  nativity ;  and  it  is  probable  that  Papias'^  derived  the  same  in- 
telligence from  the  same  place  ;  although  the  statements  of  the  lat- 
ter have  been  deformed,  probably  by  the  additions  of  the  Ebionites, 
who  were  exclusively  attached  to  Matthew's  Gospel. — The  Gospel 
of  Mark,  which  was  undoubtedly  written  for  Gentile  converts,  was 
probably  forwarded  from  Jerusalem  by  Peter  (whom  God  first 
appointed  to  the  ministry  of  the  Gentiles,  Acts  15:  7,  14),  to  the 
Christians  in  Antiochia.  Acts  1 1 :  22  etc. 

III.  3.    The  validity  of  Luke^s  testimony. 

According  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  21:  17.  24:  27,  Luke  re- 
sided with  Paul  at  Jerusalem  upwards  of  two  years.  Here  proba- 
bly, he  collected  those  correct  accounts,  which  he  tells  us  in  the 
introduction  to  his  Gospel,  1:  1 — 4,  he  possessed.  It  is  certain 
from  Acts  21  :  18,  that  James,  the  relative  of  Jesus,  was  in  Jerusa- 
lem at  the  same  time.  Now  as  the  Acts  of  the  apostles  was  pub- 
lished before  the  expiration  of  Paul's  imprisonment.  Acts  28:  30, 
and  as  Luke's  Gospel  had  been  published  before,  Acts  1 :  1  etc. 
the  date  of  the  latter  must  probably  be  fixed  at  the  time  Luke  was 
residing  with  Paul  at  Rome.  For  it  is  not  only  certain  that  Luke 
did  accompany  the  apostle  to  Rome,  Acts  28:  16,  but  he  must 
have  remained  with  him  there  a  long  time,  as  it  cannot  be  doubted 
that  Luke  the  historian  is  the  same  to  whom  allusion  is  made  by 
Paul,  in  Coloss.  4:  14,  Philem.  24,  and  2  Tim.  4:  11. 

III.  4.    Internal  evidence  of  the  credibility  of  the  Gospels. 
It  is  a  universally  acknowledged  fact,  that  the  evangelists  nar- 

1  §  75—79^         ^  2  Euseb.  H.  E.  VI.  25.  """ 

3  Dial,  cum  Trypho,  p.  333.  See  also  Opuscula  Academica,  Vol.  III.  p.  67,  etc 

4  Euseb.  H.  E.  III.  39. 


<J  5.]  CREDIBILITY    OF    THE    EVANGELISTS.  95 

rate  with  great  simplicity,  and  throughout  manifest  entire  impartial- 
ity. Had  they  been  disposed  or  permitted  to  interweave  fictitious 
interpolations  of  their  own,  they  would  have  presented  in  a  more 
prominent  manner  and  have  attempted  to  magnify  those  accounts 
which  were  favourable  to  the  cause  of  Jesus  ;^  and  on  the  contrary, 
they  would  have  endeavored  to  bestow  a  more  favourable  aspect  on 
those  incidents  which  could  be  perverted  to  the  prejudice  of  Jesus 
and  his  apostles.  Examples  of  the  latter,  are  the  taunts  of  the 
Pharisees,  and  their  demand  of  Jesus  to  work  miracles,  (Matth.  9: 
34.  12:  24,  48  etc.  16:  1—4.  Mark  8:  11,  12.)  ;  his  disregard  of 
the  popular  call  for  a  new  miracle  ;  and  notwithstanding  the  grow- 
ing dissatisfaction,  alienating  the  people  still  more  by  directing  their 
attention  to  blessings  of  greater  importance  which  he  would  bestow 
on  them,  John  6:  30.  Such  also  was  the  charge  against  Jesus  of 
being  a  glutton  and  a  wine-bibber,  and  a  friend  of  publicans  and 
sinners,  Matt.  11:  19,  and  various  censures  and  reproaches  re- 
corded in  John  7:  3 — 12,  48  etc.  10:  20;  and  hkewise  the 
scenes  of  Gethsemane,  Matth.  26:  37  etc.  Peter's  denial  of  his 
master.  Matt.  26:  69  etc.  and  Christ's  reproof  of  his  disciples  for 
inattention  to  his  miracles,  Mark  6:  49 — 52.  8:  14 — 21.  The 
form  of  this  argument  for  the  credibility  of  the  evangelists,  is  seen  in 
its  proper  light,  only  when  we  compare  the  apocryphal  Gospels  and 
histories  of  the  apostles,  with  our  genuine  books.'-^  In  regard  to  the 
Gospel  of  John,  it  is  manifest  from  the  whole  face  of  the  narrative, 
that  the  author  was  intimately  acquainted  with  the  circumstances 
which  he  relates,  and  that  he  was  a  man  of  tried  integrity  ;  that  he 
did  not  aim  at  acquiring  confidence  and  importance  among  oppo- 
sers  of  the  Gospel,  who  might  be  expected  to  scrutinize  every  thing 
he  said  ;  but  that  he  was  conscious  of  having  the  entire  confidence 
of  his  readers.  In  all  his  writings,  and  especially  in  his  Gospel, 
there  is  a  lively  sense  of  the  dignity  and  glory  of  Jesus,  and  a  tone^ 
of  confident  assurance,  which  cannot  fail  to  strike  the  attention  of 
the  reader,  and  which  evince  his  intimate  and  devout  acquaintance 
with  his  subject. 

III.  5.    The  truth  of  the  facts  narrated  in  the  Gospels  and  Acts  of 
the  Apostles^  could  not  fail  to  he  examined. 

Between  the  history  of  Jesus  and  other  histories,  there  is  a  vast 
difference,  as  to  the  necessity  there  was  for  ascertaining  the  truth  of 

1  Origen  appeals  to  this  impartiality  of  the  evangelists,  in  his  work  against 
Celsus.  Bjok  II.  §  24,  48. 

2  Compare  Fabricii  Codex  Apocryph.  N.  Test.  Kleuker  on  the  Apocrypha  of 
the  New  Test,  especially  p.  487—508.  ITDS,  and  Paulus'  Introductionis  in  N.  T. 
capp.  selectt.  p.  261,  etc. 

3  This  tone  is  observable  principally  in  19:  35.  21:  24,  and  first  epistle  1:  1—3. 


96  CREDIBILITY    OP    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

the  facts  related.  With  regard  to  the  truth  of  other  events,  we 
may,  without  involving  ourselves  in  any  material  detriment,  admit 
or  reject  it.  But  no  one  could  avow  and  vindicate  his  belief  in  the 
history  of  Jesus,  and  in  the  authority  which  this  history  ascribed  to 
him  and  his  apostles  ;  without  renouncing  habits  deeply  rooted  in 
him  from  his  youth,  and  throwing  off  prejudices  which  antiq[uity 
had  invested  with  a  kind  of  sanctity  ;  nor,  as  Pliny^  himself  con- 
fesses, without  restraining  the  love  of  vice  and  dissipation,  and  by 
so  doing  entailing  upon  himself  the  hatred  of  his  relatives,  of  his 
countrymen  and  even  of  the  human  race.  Of  this,  Jesus  forewarn- 
ed the  professors  of  his  doctrine;^  and  that  his  predictions  were 
verified,  is  evinced  not  only  by  the  Acts  of  the  apostles,^  but  by  the 
letters  of  Paul,  who  in  addressing  the  churches,'*  and  some  too 
whose  affections  he  knew  had  become  alienated  from  him,^  speaks 
of  the  sufferings  and  persecutions  of  the  Christians,  as  of  a  truth 
taught  them  by  their  own  experience,  and  universally  acknowl- 
edged. And  this  fact  is  confirmed  even  by  the  testimony  of  pagan 
writers,  who  speak  of  Christians  in  the  language  of  contempt.^ 

III.  6.     There  was  every  facility  for  detecting  misrepresentations 
in  the  Gospel  history^  if  any  had  existed. 

The  facts  here  referred  to  were,  as  we  are  informed  by  the  New 
Testament  historians,"^  universally  known  both  in  Palestine  and  in 
the  neighbouring  countries,  but  especially  at  Jerusalem,  the  capital 
of  the  country,  with  which  the  Jews  of  foreign  parts  had  much  in- 
tercourse, for  various  purposes  and  particularly  for  those  connected 
with  their  religion.  Thus  Philo  informs  us,  in  his  work  De  lega- 
tione  ad  Caium,^  that  the  Jews  of  Babylon,  and  those  of  Proconsu- 
lar Asia,  annually  forwarded  to  Jerusalem  a  considerable  sum  of 
money  for  offerings.  Now  when  Matthew  and  Mark  and  Luke 
first  published  their  several  Gospels,  it  was  perfectly  easy  for  their 
readers  to  detect  any  imposition,  or  misrepresentations  of  fact,  in 
regard  to  events  so  recent  and  so  well  understood.     Nor  can  a 

1  Epist.  L.  X.  ep.  97.  ^ 

a  Matt.  5:  10—12.  10:  21,  34—36.     Luke  12:  1—12,  51—53.  14:  25,  etc. 

3  Acts  4:  etc.  28:  22. 

4  1  Thess.  2:  2.    14  etc.  2  Thess.  1:  4—8.  Philip.  1:  29,  30. 

5  2  Cor.  11:  23,  etc.   1  Cor.  16:  9.   Gal.  3:  4.  4:  29.  6:  12, 17.   Heb.  10:  32—34. 

6  See  the  passajjes  adduced  in  §  1.  III.  1.  of  this  work. 

7  The  passages  alluded  to  are  :  Matt.  4:  23  etc.  9:  26.14:12,35,36.  15:30 
etc.  20:  29.  21:  1—11.  28:  15.  Mark  3:  7  etc.  5:  24  etc.  6:  14.  Luke  6:  17—19. 
2:  17.  24:  18—20.  John  2:  23.  4:  1,  45.  etc.  12: 10— 19.  oxoVos  oniaoj  avxov  anTjL 
^v  i.  e^  the  world  is  gone  after  him.  Ibid.  18:  20  etc.  Acts  2:  5.  and  itavros  I'd"- 
vovg  Tojv  vTto  rdv  ovqovov — out  of  every  nation  under  heaven.  Ibid.  10:  36 — 38. 

8  Page  1035  etc.  also  p.  1023. 


^  5.]  CREDIBILITY    OF    THE    EVANGELISTS.  97 

doubt  arise  whether  the  accounts  concerning  Jesus  were  known 
from  the  beginning,  and  publicly  talked  of;  for  we  learn  from  the 
book  of  Acts  that  the  principal  incidents  of  the  gospel  history,  the 
instructions,  the  miracles  and  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  were  not 
only  committed  to  writing,  but  were  made  the  theme  of  oral  com- 
munication.^ This  fact  is  established  by  Matthew  26:  13,  and  by 
Paul,  who  asserts  it  with  the  utmost  assurance,  even  in  epistles  ad- 
dressed to  persons  hostile  in  their  feelings  towards  him  and  dis- 
posed to  watch  for  his  halting.^  Moreover,  the  principal  facts  in 
the  history  of  Jesus  are  so  interwoven^  with  the  nature  and  origin 
of  Christianity,  that  even  those  among  the  earlier  Christians,  who 
entertained  different  views  of  many  christian  doctrines,  did  not 
suppose  they  could  be  called  Christians^  unless  they  adhered  to 
these  fundamental  historical  truths,  and  reconciled  them  with  their 
other  opinions.  It  is  very  questionable,  whether  any  Gnostic  sect 
denied  the  incidents  of  the  visible  history  of  Christ.  Cerinthus  in- 
deed taught  that  the  Aeon  Christ  abandoned  the  man  Jesus  during 
his  sufferings  and  death ;  but  he  admitted  that  Jesus  rose  again. 
The  Docetae,  Marcion  and  the  Manicheans,  according  to  whose 
system  every  thing  corporeal  belongs  to  the  kingdom  of  wicked- 
ness, unable  to  deny  the  facts  of  Christ's  death  and  resurrection, 
had  recourse  to  the  subterfuge  that  they  were  only  apparent. 

Among  those  written  accounts  which  have  reached  us,  the  Gos- 
pel of  Matthew  at  least  was  at  an  early  date  circulated  so  generally 
in  Palestine,  that  the  multitude  of  copies  to  which  different  addi- 
tions were  made  by  those  who  used  it,  gave  rise  to  various  and  dis- 
cordant editions  of  that  book.  And  it  is  easy  to  comprehend,  how 
various  copies  of  this  Gospel  might  be  differently  interpolated  in 
Palestine,  where  there  was  so  much  opportunity  to  obtain  both  au- 
thentic and  unauthentic  accounts  of  Jesus.  Such  an  interpolated 
Gospel  of  Matthew  must  the  Gospel  of  the  Nazarenes,  used  by 
Jerome,  have  been.  And  to  such  interpolated  copies  of  Matthew, 
Luke  doubtless  refers  (1:1,  2.),  where  he  says  :  "  Many  have  un- 
dertaken to  compose  a  history  of  the  things  which  have  occurred 
amongst  us,  as  those  delivered  them  to  us,  who,  from  the  beginning, 
were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word."  By  the  words, 
dc^ytjat^v  etc.  Luke  either  intended  to  give  the  title  of  those  written 
accounts,  or  he  wished  to  convey  the  idea,  that  the  authors  of  them 
give  the  statements  of  eye-witnesses  as  their  source  of  information. 
Yet  this  will  not  prove  that  all  these  statements  were  correct ;  for 
had  Luke  regarded  those  difjyj^aecg  as  perfectly  authentic,  he  would 
not  (v.  3,  4,)  have  opposed  his  own  Gospel  to  them,  as  being  a  his- 

1  Acts  2:  22  etc.  i:V.  24—31.  (compare  v.  11.)  17:  18,  31.  25:  19.  26:  22,  23,  26, 
ovyoQ  ioTiv  iv  yiovia  TceitQayfitvovtovro,  fgr  this  thing  was  not  done  in  a  cor- 
ner. 2  1  Cor.  15:  3—11.  Coloss.  1:  23.  Heb.  2:  3,  4.  3  1  Tim.  3: 15,  etc. 

13 


98  CREmBlLITY  OF  THK  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 


tory  of  Jesus  composed  angi^oig,  with  the  greatest  accuracy.  Pa- 
pias  also  seems  to  confirm  the  idea  of  various  different  transcripts  of 
Matthew,  when  he  says  :^  Mui&u7og  *E^quWl  diuh'xtm  id  loyiot 
GvvtyQuc^ixo'  riQUTiVtvoi  8  otura,  mq  tdvvuTO,  tnuatog,  i.  e.  Matthew 
wrote  his  Gospel  in  the  Hebrew  tongue  ;  and  each  one  interpreted 
it  as  he  could.  The  word  riQf.ir,vivG£  may  refer  partly  ta  the  trans- 
lations from  the  Hebrew,  and  partly  to  additions. 

Again  the  gospel  of  Mark,  which  seems  to  have  been  written  the 
earliest  of  all,  and  in  Palestine,  must  have  been  well  known  among 
foreign  Christians  both  at  Antioch  and  in  more  remote  places,  even 
before  the  imprisonment  of  Paul  at  Rome ;  as  may  be  inferred 
from  1  Cor.  7:  10.  2  Cor.  8:  18.  That  the  Gospel  of  Mark  was 
written  before  either  of  the  other  Gospels,  is  probable  from  the 
following  considerations  :  first,  the  coincidence  of  Mark  with  Mat- 
tliew  and  Luke,  is  accounted  for  just  as  well  by  the  supposition  that 
the  two  latter  had  Mark  before  them,  as  by  the  contrary  supposition 
that  Mark  availed  himself  of  their  Gospels :  secondly,  if  Mark  wrote 
his  Gospel  first,  this  circumstance  will  best  account  for  tiie  fact 
•that  Matthew  and  Luke  contain  so  much  which  is  not  found  in  the 
Gospel  of  Mark.  For  both  were  in  possession  of  a  sufficiency  of 
supplementary  matter.  On  the  other  hand,  if  Mark  had  the  Gos- 
pels of  Matthew  and  Luke  before  him  it  would  be  unaccountable 
that  he  should  omit  so  large  a  portion  of  their  contents  :  thirdly^ 
Mark  contains  but  little  which  is  not  found  in  Matthew  and  Luke^ 
And  is  it  probable  that  he  would  have  composed  a  new  Gospel 
for  the  sake  of  these  few  supplements  if  the  Gospels  of  Matthew 
and  Luke  had  previously  existed  ?  Besides  ;  what  part  could  Pe- 
ter have  had  in  the  composition  of  Mark's  Gospel,  if  Mark  derived 
nearly  the  whole  of  it  from  Matthew  and  Luke  ?  or  how  could  it 
be  asserted,  that  Mark  wrote  cuV  UttQoq  tq^yrjoaTO  aviM  as  Peter 
dictated  to  him  ?  From  all  this,  it  is  probable  that  the  earliest  Gos- 
pel was  that  of  Mark.  Again ;  in  favour  of  the  supposition  that 
the  Gospel  of  Mark  was  written  primarily  for  the  Antiochians,  it  has 
been  urged  ;  first,  that  the  Greeks  in  Antioch,  who  were  convert- 
ed by  Christians  that  were  natives  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene  (Acts  llr 
20,)  were  "jEkXfjveg  (Acts  15:  1,)  or  uncircumcised  ;  and  for  such, 
evidently,  was  the  Gospel  of  Mark  composed.  Secondly,  the  deep- 
est interest  was  felt  at  Jerusalem  for  the  Christians  at  Antioch  ; 
and  as  soon  as  intelligence  of  their  conversion  had  reached  that  place, 
Barnabas  was  despatched  to  them  without  delay,  (Acts  11: 
22.)  Now  the  preparation  of  a  Greek  biography  of  Jesus  for  the 
new  Christians  would  be  perfectly  consonant  with  this  solicitude  for 
their  prosperity  ;  as  would  also  be  the  commission  of  this  charge  to 
Mark,  who  was  the  nephew  of  Barnabas,  Col.  4:   10.     Thirdly y 

1  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  III.  39"  ^~ 


§  5.]  CREDIBILITY  OF  THE  GOSPEL  HISTORY.  99 

the  sons  of  Simon  of  Cyrene^  who  are  mentioned  only  in  Mark's 
Gospel  (15:  22),  probably  were  among  those  Christians  of  Cyrene, 
spoken  of  in  Acts  1 1 :  20,  [as  having  come  and  preached  the  Lord 
Jesus  at  Antioch ;  and  if  so,  the  fact  that  their  father  bore  the 
Saviour's  cross  would  have  been  an  interesting  circumstance  to  the 
Antiochians,  and  consequently  would  be  peculiarly  suitable  to  be 
mentioned  in  a  Gospel  addressed  to  them].  Finally,  that  this 
Gospel  was  published  prior  to  Paul's  imprisonment  at  Rome,  is  in- 
ferred from  2  Cor.  8:  1 8,  where  the  apostle  speaks  of  an  adsXcpog, 
olf  6  i'natvog  iv  Tfo  (vccyyeXlco  dia  naoMv  ixaXi^atwv,  i.  e.  a  brother 
who  has  acquired  praise  through  all  the  churches,  by  his  services  in 
regard  to  the  Gospel.  This  ddeXcpog  (brother)  seems  to  have  been 
Mark.  For  although  it  cannot  be  clearly  proved  that  ivayyiXiov 
was  at  that  early  period  used  to  denote  a  biography  of  Jesus ;  still 
the  praise  which  he  is  said,  in  general  terms,  to  have  acquired  by  his 
services  in  the  Gospel,  might  arise  not  only  from  his  travels  for  the 
extension  of  Christianity,  but  also  from  his  historical  account  of 
Jesus.  Paul,  it  appears,  was  not  ignorant  of  Mark's  Gospel ;  at 
least  the  passage  1  Cor.  7:  1 0,  which  he  adduces  as  a  declaration 
of  Christ,  is  found  no  where  except  in  Mark  10:  12.  This  same 
ddiXcpog  Paul  sent  with  Titus  to  Corinth,  to  collect  a  contribution 
for  the  Christians  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  for  such  a  charge,  Mark  was 
peculiarly  adapted,  being  a  member  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem 
(Acts  12:  12,)  and  a  companion  of  Barnabas  (Acts  15:  39,)  who 
was  likewise  concerned  with  this  contribution,  Gal.  2:  1.  Nor 
could  Mark,  as  a  pupil  of  Peter  and  a  member  of  the  church  at 
Jerusalem,  fail  to  possess  influence  with  that  portion  of  the  church 
at  Corinth,  which  was  disposed  to  adhere  to  the  party  of  the  apos- 
tles Peter  and  James,  and  to  which  Mark,  in  company  with  Titus, 
was  sent  by  Paul.  [From  these  considerations  it  appears  that  Mark 
was  the  adeXcfog  or  brother,  of  whom  Paul  says,  that  he  had  ac- 
quired the  approbation  of  all  the  churches  by  his  services  in  regard 
to  the  Gospel;  and  that  Paul  was  himself  acquainted  with  Mark's 
Gospel ;  and  hence  it  of  course  follows  that  this  Gospel  must  have 
been  published,  and  was  open  to  scrutiny  and  to  detection  if  it  had 
contained  any  misrepresentation]. 

Finally,  that  the  writings  of  Luke,  which  were  published  during 
the  imprisonment  of  Paul,  must  necessarily  have  been  early  known, 
not  only  to  Theophilus  and  his  fellow-citizens,^  but  also  to  the  in- 

l  These  could  not  have  been  well  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine  ;  for  how  could 
Luke,  himself  a  stranger  there,  have  written  what  is  recorded  in  his  Gospel  (ch. 
1:4.)  to  a  person  resident  in  the  very  theatre  of  the  transactions  he  relates? 
Michaelis  in  the  3d  edition  of  his  Introduction  to  the  N.  Test,  quotes  from  a  trea- 
tise of  Theodore  Hase,  the  opinion  that  Theophilus  was  a  native  of  Palestine, 
and  had  been  high  priest.  And  in  the  4th  ed.  (p.  1091.)  he  was  as  much  disposed 
to  adopt  this  opinion  himself,  as  he  was  to  treat  it  as  an  improbable  conjecture  in 
the  third  (p.  933,  936.) 


100  CREDIBILITY  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

habitants  of  other  countries  ;  is  proved  in  the  work  "  On  the  Ob- 
ject of  the  Gospel  history  of  John,"  p.  377.  If  we  suppose  Luke's 
Gospel  was  written  in  the  commencement  of  Paul's  imprisonment  at 
Rome,  while  various  other  Asiatic  Christians  beside  Luke  were  at- 
tending him,  and  that  some  of  these  returned  to  Asia  during  the 
continuance  of  the  apostle's  captivity  ;  this  will  account  satisfactorily 
for  the  early  promulgation  of  Luke's  Gospel  in  Asia. 

III.  7.  2Jie  truth  of  the  Gospel  history  must  be  admitted;  for 
even  those  whose  depravity  prompted  them  to  disobey  its  injunc- 
tions, acknowledged  its  fundamental  facts.  , 

The  first  epistle  of  Peter,  which  was  universally  received  as 
genuine,  and  those  epistles  of  Paul  which  were  addressed  to  particu- 
lar Churches  or  to  their  officers,^  shew,  both  in  their  superscriptions 
and  in  various  particular  passages,^  that  the  early  existence  of  chris- 
tian churches  was  a  well  known  fact.  The  Annals  of  Tacitus  also 
corroborate  what  is  stated  in  the  Acts  of  the  apostles  (ch.  9.  etc.) 
in  regard  to  the  multitudes  of  Christians  not  only  in  Judea  and  else- 
where, but  even  in  Rome  itself,  before  and  during  the  reign  of  the 
emperor  Nero.^  Hence  we  must  necessarily  infer  that  the  facts,  of 
the  truth  of  which  every  Christian  was  required  to  profess  his  con- 
viction, were  actually  believed  by  a  great  multitude  of  persons,  at  a 
time,  when  it  was  an  easy  thing  to  investigate  their  truth,  but  no 
easy  matter  to  avow  a  belief  of  them  ;  and,  consequently,  that  these 
facts  were  not  manifestly  fictitious  and  false,  but  were  really  atten- 
ded by  evidence  which  appeared  satisfactory  on  the  closest  investi- 
gation. Nor  is  it  difficult  to  understand  why  some,  who  were  ac- 
quainted with  the  facts  on  which  the  christian  religion  is  based, 
should  nevertheless  disavow  Christianity.  For,  the  fear  which  led 
them  to  conceal  their  favourable  opinion  of  the  cause  of  Jesus,^  or 
at  least  not  to  venture  actually  to  attach  themselves  to  the  Chris- 
tians,^ nay,  even  the  hostility  which  their  conduct  on  some  occasions 
betrayed,  can  be  naturally  accounted  for,  without  impairing  in  the 
least  the  truth  and  indisputable  certainty  of  the  history  of  Jesus. — 
Prejudice  and  passion,  which  in  Christians  nothing  but  the  force  of 


1  1  Tim.  1:  3.  3:  15.  4.  11  etc.  Tit.  1:  5  etc. 

2  1  Cor.  1:  2.  7:  17.  11:  16.  14:  33.  16:  1,  8  etc.  19.  2  Cor.  8:  1.11:  28.  Gal. 
1:  22.  2:  7—10.     Rom.  15:  19—27. 

3  See  Annotationes  ad  philosophicam  Kantii  de  religione  doctrinam,  §  XIX- 
(1793,)  where  it  is  remarked,  that  this  testimony  of  Tacitus  authorizes  the  infer- 
ence that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  must  have  been  historically  true. 

-«  See  John  12:  42,  43.  3:  2.  7:   13.  9:  21—23. 

5  Acts  5:  12, 13.  Compare  "  An  Andress  to  a  female  friend,  whose  faith  in  the 
divinity  of  the  Christian  religion  had  become  wavering,"  p.  74  etc. 


<5)  5.]  CREDIBILITY  OF  THE  GOSPEL  HISTORY,  101 

truth  could  entirely  overcome,  might  have  possessed  so  great  an 
influence^  with  persons  of  little  love  for  truth,  and  of  a  contumacious 
spirit,  as  to  urge  them  to  dispute  even  the  most  indubitable  facts. — 
Thus,  the  inhabitants  of  his  "  own  country"  regarded  the  doctrines 
of  Jesus  with  amazement,  but  were  offended  at  the  humility  of  his 
origin;^  the  Pharisees  said,  "This  man  is  not  of  God,  because  he 
keepeth  not  the  Sabbath  day  ;"^  and  the  Sadducees,  who  denied 
the  resurrection,  were  displeased  that  Peter  and  John  should  preach 
Jesus  as  risen  from  the  dead.*  Moreover,  the  truth^  of  these  facts 
was  actually  acknowledged  by  many,^  who  were  selfish  enough"^  to 
deny  the  consequences  which  flowed  from  them.  Such  persons  did 
violence^  to  their  own  conscience ;  and  this,  sometimes  with  the 
most  impious  and  unblushing  audacity ,9  without  any  pretext  at  all ; 
at  other  times  under  pretence  of  some  difficulty^^  attending  those 
doctrines  of  Jesus  in  support  of  which  miracles  had  been  wrought 
before  their  eyes,  or  they  attempted  to  account  for  these  miraculous 
events  by  ascribing  them  to  some  cause,  which,  instead  of  recom- 
mending Christianity,  would  reflect  disgrace  and  odium  upon  it.^'^ 
The  real  cause  of  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  gospel  history  will 
hereafter  be  considered,  (§  8.  111.  8.)  all  that  needs  to  be  proved  in 
this  place  is,  that  the  facts  of  the  New  Testament  history  are  not 
fictitious,  but  were  actually  observed  by  eye  and  ear-witnesses,  pre- 
cisely in  the  manner  recorded. 

On  the  credibility  of  the  historical  contents  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, the  reader  is  referred  to  the  following  works  :  Kleuker,  vol. 
III.  part  II.  sect.  1.  Hanlein,  pt.  I.  chap.  4.  §  2.  Hug's  Introd. 
pt.  I.  p.  83 — 87.  Bogue's  Essay  on  the  divine  authority  of  the 
New  Testament,  p.  19,  25,  88—102. 

1  See  Ernesti  Opuscula  philolo^co-critica,  p.  93  etc.  ed.  Lugd.  Bat. 
^  Matt.  13:  54  etc.  15:  12.  compare  v.  II.  Luke  20:  19,  compare  9—18.  John  7: 
47_52.  3  John  9: 16.  4  Acts  4: 2.  17:  32. 

5  John  11:  47,  48  etc.    Acts  5:  28.  6: 13  etc. 

6  Matthew  27:  42.  John  7:  3,  5,  21—26.  9:  16—18. 10:  21.  11:  47  etc.  12:  10,  11. 
Luke  13:  14,  where  the  Ruler  of  the  synagogue  acknowledges  the  miracle 
wrought  by  Jesus.  Acts  2:  22  xaS-ajg  xai  avrol  oiSars,  as  you  yourselves  also 
know.     4:  7.  (comp.  3:2—8)  14— 16,  21,  22. 

7  Matth.  11:  16—19.  8  John  15:  22—25.  Matth.  11:  20—24. 

9  Luke  16:  11.  John  9:24,28,  34  11:  49.and  Acts  4:  17,  18,  21.5: 17  (comp.  v. 
14—16.)  28:  40.  7:  54,  57  etc.  11:  3.  comp.  v.  11.  1  Thess.  2: 15. 

10  John  7:  27,  41  etc.  U  Matt.  9:  34.  12:  24.  Acts  2:  13. 


I 


102  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK. 


SECTION    VI. 

Jesus  himself  prof  esses  the  divinity  of  his  mission  and  doctrines. 
It  is  therefore  historically  true,  that  the  Founder  of  Christianity, 
who  (as  Tacitus  informs  us,  Annal.  L.  XV.  c.  44.)  was  put  to 
death  by  Pontius  Pilate  the  Procurator,  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius, 
did  profess  to  be  a  divine  messenger  ;(1)  who  had  neither  derived 
his  doctrines  from  other  men,  nor  discovered  them  by  the  powers  of 
bis  own  mind,(2)  but  received  them  from  God. (3)  According  to 
his  own  declaration,  his  conscientious  reverence  for  God  (John  5: 
30.  7:  18.  8:  29,  55),  and  most  intimate  union  with  him  (John 
8:  16,  29.  14:  10.  10:  38.  16:  15),  rendered  it  impossible  for  him 
to  communicate  any  thing  solely  by  himself,  or  without  the  co-ope- 
ration of  God. (4)  It  was  in  virtue  of  this  his  constant  union  with 
God,  that  he  demanded  that  all  his  communications(5)  should  be 
received,  not  as  the  doctrines  of  the  mere  man  Jesus,  but  as  the 
declarations  of  God (6)  himself;  and  that  they  should  therefore  be 
regarded  as  perfect  truth. (7)  Hence  he  required,  that  in  those 
things  which  should  transcend  the  limits  of  human  knowledge,  we 
should  implicitly  believe  him  upon  his  own  authority  ;  that  we 
should  receive  his  declarations  as  the  testimony  of  one  who  had 
long  been  most  intimately  united  with  God, (8)  and  who  had  the 
most  perfect  acquaintance(9)  (Matt.  11:  27.  John  8:  55,)  with 
things  divine,  and  lying  beyond  the  reach  of  our  knowledge.  Ac- 
cordingly, he  assured  his  hearers,  that  nothing  but  irreverence  for 
God, (10)  which  is  itself  criminal, (11)  could  prompt  them  to  reject 
his  doctrines ;  and  on  the  contrary,  that  every  one  who  believed 
him,  believed  God  himself.  (12)  Nor  is  there  reason  to  fear,  that 
his  apostles  and  disciples  might  have  misunderstood  what  he  taught 
concerning  his  union  with  God  ;  inasmuch  as  his  pretensions  were 
generally  known,  and  were  frequently  disputed  by  his  enemies,  (Matt. 
26:  63,  68.  27:  54.  John  19:  7.  5:  18.  6:  41  etc.  10:  33,  36.) 

ILLUSTRATIONS. 

1st  Illustration.  The  expressions  which  Jesus  used  concerning 
the  divinity  of  his  mission,  are  these  :  ^fo?,  6  naxriQ  aniaxuXs — 
tntfxipi  fx£  God  the  Father  deputed — sent  me,  John  8:  42.  6:  29. 
17:  3,  aneavetXag  eigtov  k6g(aov  thou  didst  depute  (or  send)  me  as 
an  apostle  into  the  world,  John  17:  18,  23.  5:  27  etc.  8:  16,  18. 


«5>  6.]  TESTIMONY  OF  JESUS.  103 

7:  16,28:  tyoi  ikriXvi>a  iv  ovofAaivtov  nargog  fAOv  I  am  come  in 
my  Father's  name,  John  5:  43  ;  an  ifiavrou  ovx  ik^Xvita,  aXk'  eotiv 
dXridivog  6  mfixpag  /wf  I  came  not  of  myself,  but  he  is  true  who  sent 
me,  John,  7:  28. 

On  the  signification  of  these  expressions  of  Jesus  relative  to  the 
divinity  of  his  mission  and  doctrines,  and  concerning  faith  in  his  di- 
vine authority  ;  the  reader  may  consult  Siiskind's  historico-exegeti- 
cal  investigation  of  the  question  :  "  In  what  respect  did  Jesus  assert 
the  divinity  of  his  religious  doctrines  and  practice  ?"  published  Tu- 
bingen 1802  ;  and  the  German  edition  of  the  two  dissertations  De 
sensu,  quo  suam  Jesus  doctrinam  divinam  perhibuerit.  P.  I.  1798, 
P.  11.  1801.  In  this  work  of  Siiskind,  the  divinity  (in  the  strict 
sense  of  the  word,)  of  the  doctrines  and  mission  of  Jesus,  is  proved 
from  the  declarations  of  the  Saviour  himself:  and  vindicated  against 
those  explanations  of  the  above  mentioned  passages  of  John,  which 
would  make  them  teach  the  divinity  of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  only 
in  a  vague  sense.  See  also  the  dissertation  of  the  author  of  this 
work  "  On  the  spirit  of  Christianity,"  in  Flatt's  Magazine  vol.  I.  p. 
105—110. 

Note.  The  hypothesis,  which  derives  the  plan  and  doctrines  of 
Jesus  from  the  Essene  school,  has  lately  been  advocated  by  Staud- 
lin.  The  reader  is  referred  to  what  Bengel  has  said  in  opposition 
to  it,  in  his  "  Remarks  on  the  attempt  to  derive  Christianity  from 
the  tenets  of  the  Essenes,"  in  Flatt's  Magazine  vol.  VII.  p.  126 
etc.  See  also  the  Tiibinger  gelehrt.  anzeigen,  for  1800,  p.  387, 
and  Liinerwald,  "  On  the  pretended  derivation  of  Christianity  from 
the  Essene  doctrines,"  in  Henke's  Magazine  vol.  IV.  pt.  2,  p.  371. 

2d  Illustration.  Ilcjg  oviogygafA^iaru  oide,  firj  f^f^ia&tjicojg — »J  /^?J 
Sidaxv  ova  iaxiv  i(A.r,,  aXXct  tov  ni^ixpaviog  ^e^  how  knoweth  this  man 
the  scriptures,  since  he  is  not  of  the  learned  ? — my  doctrine  is  not 
mine,  but  his  who  sent  me.  On  this  passage,  the  author  has  made 
the  following  remark  :"^  "  The  phrase  ova  Igtlv  ifirj,  proves  that  the 
contrasted  one  IgtI  tov  nt^-tpavTog  fie  as  well  as  that  in  verse  17, 
ix  tov  d^eov,  signifies  more  than  merely  this  :  my  doctrine  is  deriv- 
ed from  the  will  of  God  as  discovered  by  reason  ;  the*  voice  of  God 
in  me  (the  voice  of  conscience)  prompts  me  to  teach  ;  my  doctrine 
flowed  from  reflection  on  the  will  of  God.  For  on  this  supposition, 
the  reason  and  conscience  referred  to,  would  be  the  mere  human 
reason  and  human  conscience  of  Jesus.  But  conscience.  If  left  to 
herself,  is  liable  to  error,  even  when  the  intention  is  sincere ;  so  that 
the  voice  of  conscience  may  be  the  voice  of  an  erring  conscience, 
and  con'sequently  merely  the  supposed  voice  of  God." 

3d  Illustration.  John  7:  16.   14:  24. 

•  John  7:  15,  16.  2  See  Flatt's  Magazine,  vol.  IV.  p.  219. 

3  See  Flatt's  Magazine  vol.  I,  p.  117,  note  4.  ..^^^  ,;>i*j,i;i;Jjiili-  l 


104  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bk,  I. 

4th  Illustration.  John  8:  26,  28,  40.  12:  49,  50.  15:  15.  17: 
8.  Matthew  11:  27. 

5th  Illustration.  John  5:  30.  8:  28.  14:  10.  12:  49. 

6th  Illustration.  John  12:  48 — 50.  compare  ovdiv  v.  30,  and 
Ticivia  Matt.  11:  27.  John  17:  7.^  If,  in  accordance  with  the  will 
of  God,  the  man  Jesus  remained  unacquainted  with  any  thing  (<§> 
80)  ;  on  such  subjects  he  did  not  pubhsh  his  own  (human)  views, 
but  acknowledged  his  ignorance,  as  in  Mark  13:  32.  Hence  it  fol- 
lows, that  even  in  such  cases,  he  taught  nothing  which  was  his  own, 
(*|  kavTOv  of  himself,  John  5:  30.  8:  28.  12:  49),  nothing  without 
a  commission  from  the  Father,  or  contrary  to  his  will,  John  12:  49. 
8:  28.  Moreover,  the  cause  of  this  nescience,  was  not  a  limited 
divine  influence,  arising  from  a  limited  union  of  the  man  Jesus  with 
the  divinity,  (for  this  was  in  itself  unbounded,)  John  3:  34;  but  it 
arose  from  a  voluntary  restriction,  (<§»  81.  111.  4,)  by  virtue  of  which, 
Jesus  himself  did  not  wish  to  know  more  than  the  divine  omnis- 
cience, with  which  he  was  most  closely  united,  (<§>  76,)  chose  at 
that  time  (^  80,)  to  communicate  to  him  (•§.  44.) 

7th  Illustration.  John  7:  16.  14:  24.  17:  8,  14,  td  grujiaTa  a 
didtaadg  fioi — o  loyog  gov  the  words  which  thou  gavest  me — thy 
word.  In  v.  8,  47,  comp.  v.  43.  Thus  John  the  Baptist  says  of 
Jesus,  Tct  ^rifiara  tov  &iov  XaXe7  he  speaketh  the  words  of  God, 
John  3:  34 ;  and  Jesus  approved  his  testimony,  John  5:  33.  Com. 
Luke  11:  49.  Matt.  23:  34. 

8th  Illustration.  John  8:  16,  26,  40,  45—47.  John  5:  30.  17: 
8,  comp.  3:  33,  and  34,  and  ^  36. 

9th  Illustration.  'O  ix  tov  ov^avov  -Aotta^dg — o  uv  nagd  tov 
diov^  iwgaxs  tov  najiga — tdv  ovv  '&i(og^T£  tov  vlov  tov  dv&gcoTiov 
ava^uivoviay  onov  ^v  to  ngoTegov — f^rjkxtov  noigd  tov  nuTgog — tiu- 
liv  nogevofiat  ngog  tov  naiiga  he  who  came  down  from  heaven — 
he  who  is  from  God,  hath  seen  the  Father — if  ye  should  see  the 
Son  of  man  ascending  to  where  he  was  before? — I  came  forth  from 
the  Father— again  I  go  to  the  Father,  John  3:  13.  6:  46,  62.  16: 
28,  comp.  3:  31.        ^        ^  ^ 

10th  Illustration.  'O  /mjJ  7iigt€vojv,  rjdij  xt'xgiTai  he  that  believeth 
not,  is  condemned  already,  John  3:  18. 

1 1  th  Illustration.  This  belief  on  the  authority  of  Jesus,  in  things 
which  lie  beyond  human  knowledge,  is  demanded  by  him  in  John 
3:  11—18,  32. 

12th  Illustration.  John  12:  48,49.  5:  38,42—44.  8:  42—47. 
Luke  10:  16,  6  di  ifii  dd^ezolv,  d^ezel  tov  dnoaTftXavTa  fts  he  that 
despiseth  me,  despiseth  him  that  sent  me. 

13th  Illustration.  'O  tov  Xoyov  fiov  dxovcov,  xul  niOTSV(ov  Tia 
mfixpavTi  lit  he  that  heareth  my  doctrine,  and  believeth  him  who 
sent  me,  John  12:  44.  5:  24.  13:  20,  comp.  3:  3  etc.  See  on  this 
passage  the  Magazine,  vol.  VII,  p.  67  etc. 


§  7.]  CREDIBILITY  OF  THE  DECLARATIONS  OF  JESUS.  105 


SECTION   VII. 

Evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  professions  and  declarations  of  Jesus 
concerning  himself. 

I.  FROM  HIS  CHARACTER  AND  GENERAL  CONDUCT. 

Although  the  declarations  of  Jesus  Goncem'ing  his  union  with  God, 
may  have  been  grounded  on  his  own  internal  and  immediate  con- 
sciousness, which  afforded  him  the  fullest  conviction  of  their 
truth  ;(1)  yet  the  only  evidence  by  which  others  can  be  convinced 
of  their  truth,  must  be  external,  or  must  consist  in  facts  which  ac- 
cord with  his  professions. (2)  And  such  evidence  is  not  wanting. 
The  general  character  and  conduct  of  Jesus  shield  him  from  the 
suspicion  of  having  knowingly  laid  claim  to  a  connexion  with  God 
which  was  fictitious  and  imaginary  ;  his  character  entitles  his  testi- 
mony to  credence  (John  14:  10.  10;  38).  So  far  was  he  removed 
from  any  visionary  projects,(3)  which  might  have  led  him  intention- 
ally to  feign  any  particular  relation  to  God,  that  he  rejected  those 
acknowledgements  of  respect  which  were  obtruded  on  him  :(4)  and 
on  the  contrary,  out  of  pure  love  to  God  (Matt.  S6:  63  etc.  John 
8:  49)  and  to  the  truth  which  he  was  commissioned  to  teach  (John 
8:  55),  he  persevered  in  asserting  uniformly  his  extraordinary  union 
with  God,  although  it  evidently  entailed  on  him  the  most  grievous 
consequences. (5)  Nor  did  he  relinquish  these  high  pretensions, 
even  at  a  time  when  he  could  have  promised  himself  not  a  single 
advantage  from  them,  (Matt.  26:  64.  Luke  22:  69.  23:  46,  42,) 
unless  he  was  Immovably  convinced  of  their  truth,  and  of  the  divine 
approbation  of  his  conduct  in  avowing  them.  And  how  sincere  and 
firm  his  conviction  was  of  the  reality  of  that  extraordinary  coopera- 
tion of  God  to  which  he  laid  claim,  is  evinced  by  his  confident  ex- 
pectation of  the  successful  issue  that  would  crown  his  purposes,  after 
he  should  have  submitted  to  a  disgraceful  death,  which  seemed  ac- 
cording to  human  calculation  (Luke  24:  19 — ^21)  the  greatest  ob- 
stacle to  their  success. (6)  And  this  expectation,  he  avowed  by  the 
most  express  and  confident  assertions,(10)  as  well  as  by  his  actions; 
in  defiance  of  the  unpromising  conunencement  of  his  work,  (7)  and 
14 


106  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.   I, 

the  most  formidable  obstacle  to  its  advancement ;  in  opposition  to 
the  tardy  improvement  and  great  imbecility  of  those  who  were  to 
be  the  instruments  of  the  propagation  of  his  doctrines  after  his 
death  ;(8)  from  whose  agency  he  could  himself  have  expected  but 
little,  if  he  had  not  possessed  a  firm  confidence  in  the  aid  of  God. (9) 
For  he  refused  that  honour,  which  he  might  have  obtained  by  means 
of  popularity  and  human  management,  (John  6:  15)  :  he  sought 
neither  to  procure  nor  to  retain  the  applause  of  the  multitude,(ll) 
and  he  did  not  court  the  favour  of  the  great. (12)  On  the  contrary^ 
although  he  was  early  conscious  of  the  exalted  nature  of  his  desti- 
nation, (Luke  2:  46^ — 49),  he  did  not  prosecute  his  wide  and  com- 
prehensive plan  (John  4:  21 — 23.  10:  16)(13)  with  impassioned 
ardour :  nor  was  he  in  haste  to  enter  precipitately  (Luke  3:  23)  on 
the  duties  of  his  public  office,  but  designedly  postponed  the  execu- 
tion of  the  greater  part  of  his  plan,  till  the  time  subsequent  to  his 
death. (14)  This  moderation  in  the  execution  of  a  plan,  with 
which  Jesus  professed  to  believe  himself  entrusted  by  God,  is  dia- 
metrically opposed  to  the  character  of  an  enthusiast,  who  might 
merely  imagine  himself  the  subject  of  the  peculiar  aid  and  influ- 
ence of  God.  An  enthusiast  would  not  indeed  have  entertained 
such  extensive  views,(15)  or  have  fixed  on  so  comprehensive(16)  a 
plan, (17)  and  especially  while  the  immediate  results  were  so  incon- 
siderable as  those  which  appeared  during  the  life  of  Jesus  (Matt. 
13:  31 — 33).  Besides,  a  person  of  fanatical  character  would  un- 
doubtedly have  seized,  and  by  the  aid  of  a  glowing  fancy  have 
wrought  still  higher,  the  popular  ideas  concerning  the  Messiah  ;(18) 
ideas  so  grateful  to  an  enthusiastic  mind,  and  so  current  among  the 
Jews  in  the  days  of  Jesus, (19)  that  notwithstanding  he  frequently 
and  explicitly  opposed  them, (20)  his  very  disciples^could  not  relin- 
quish them  but  with  the  greatest  difficulty, (21)  and  only  after  the 
death  of  him  whom  they  regarded  as  the  Messiah  (Luke  20:  25 — 46). 

Illustrations. 

1st  Illustration.  The  certainty  with  which  Jesus  believed  him- 
self united  with  God,  he  expresses  in  these  words  eyoj  oidu  I  know, 
John  8:  14.  That  an  immediate  and  infallible  consciousness  of  the 
divine  agency  in  the  soul  of  Jesus,  was  not  impossible,  is  proved  by 
Koppen,  in  his  treatise  eatitled  "  The  Bible  a  work  of  divine  wis- 


§  7*]  CREDIBILITY  OF  THE  DECLARATION  OF  JESUS.  107 

dom ;"  by  Kleuker,  in  his  *^  Examination  and  explanation  of  the 
principal  evidences  for  the  truth  and  divine  origin  of  Christianity  ; 
and  by  Flatt,  in  his  dissertation  entitled  "  Observationes  ad  compa- 
randam  Kantianam  disciplinam  cum  doctrina  Christiana  pertinentes.'^ 
This  possibility,  which  is  the  object  of  present  inquiry,  is  also  ad- 
mitted by  Plank,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  theological  sciences ; 
and  by  Schmid,  in  his  Moral  Philosophy. 

2d  Illustration.  John  5:  31,  36.  (compare  the  work  "On  the 
object  of  John's  Gospel,"  p.  199  etc.)  John  15:  24. 

8d  Illustration.  uC^tmv  ttiv  do^av  tov  ntfiipavTog  aviov  (in  op- 
position to  0  CrjTWv  triv  do^av  rijv  idiav)  alTjOijg  Igti^  not  cidtxia  Iv 
Kvrm  ovx  htt  he  that  seeketh  the  glory  of  him  who  sent  him  (in 
opposition  to  "  he  that  seeketh  his  own  glory")  is  true,  and  false- 
hood is  not  in  him.  John  7:  18. 

4th  Illustration.  John  6:  15.  Matt.  16:  20.  17:  9.  Luke  12: 
13  etc, 

5th  Illustration.  John  5:  18.  6:  60,66.  10:  31—33.  Matt.  26: 
63—66. 

6th  Illustration.  After  Jesus  had  declared  that  his  church  should 
be  invincible,  he  immediately  apprised  his  disciples  of  the  sufferings 
and  death  which  awaited  himself,  Matt.  16:  18 — 23,  and  21: 
37 — 43.  26:  11 — 13.  He  speaks  of  his  death,  and  likewise  of  the 
extension  of  his  gospel  over  the  whole  earth,  John  3:  14 — 16.  6: 
51.  10:  15,  16.  12:  24,  31,  32.  16:  7,  8.  17:  19.  And  in  John 
8:  28,  he  states  that  only  when  his  enemies  should  have  brought 
him  to  the  cross  {oiav  vipwariTe  comp.  12:  33),  when  his  life  should 
be  taken  away,  not  by  his  own  hands  but  by  those  of  his  enemies 
(8:  22),  would  the  progress  of  his  work  make  it  appear  more  satis- 
factorily, that  he  had  not  been  guided  by  caprice,  which  would  ne- 
cessarily cease  to  act  at  death  ;  and  in  general,  that  he  had  not  been 
acting  for  himself  merely  aqj  iuvioVf  but  that  it  was  the  cause  and 
the  work  of  God  in  which  he  was  engaged.  Now  the  plans  of  God, 
the  murderers  of  Jesus  had  not  power  to  defeat ;  because  he  was 
able  to  raise  Jesus  from  the  dead,  and  to  accomplish  his  divine  pre- 
dictions relative  to  his  return  to  the  Father  (8:  14,  21)  with  all  the 
important  consequences  of  that  return  (16:  7.  Matt.  24:  14  etc. 
comp.  John  8:  24,  50),  in  a  manner  which  would  place  the  declara- 
tions of  Jesus,  that  he  acted  under  immediate  divine  influence,  be- 
yond all  doubt.  (John  8:  16,  13.) 

The  value  of  the  argument  in  support  of  the  claim  of  Jesus  to  a 
divine  mission,  which  is  afforded  by  his  voluntary  sacrifice  of  him- 
self, is  shown  by  Schwartze,  in  his  work  On  the  death  of  Jesus, 
Leipsic,  1805,  p.  87—107 ;  and  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Vol  I.  p.  83 
— 87.  Compare  Flatt's  dissertation  in  Vol.  XII.  entitled,  "  Lasst 
sich  die  Ueberzeugunji  Jesu  von  der  Gewissheit  und   moralischen 


i08  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

Nothwendigkeit  seines  friihen  Todes  aus  einem  rationalistischen 
Gesichtspunkt  betrachten  ?" 

7th  Illustration  John  3:  32.  15:  20,  etc.  Matt.  II;  16—24.  10: 
25. 

8th  Illustration.  Matt.  16:  23.  17:  17.  26:  31—35,  41.  Mark  6: 
52.  J:  18.  8:  17— 21.  Luke  18:  34.  24:  11.  John  16:  12,  (iii  noX- 
Aa  i'jfw  Xf'yecp  vfi7v,  aXX'  ov  duvaaOi  ^aaxa^evv  agrt  I  have  still  ma- 
ny things  to  tell  vou,  but  ye  are  not  able  to  bear  thera  yet).  John 
20:9,19,25. 

9th  Illustration.  Luke  22:  32.  John  16:  17,  26. 15:  26.  16:  5— 
15.  17:  9—17. 

10th  Illustration.  Matt.  13:  31—33.  10:  18.  24:  14.  compare 
lUust.  6. 

11th  Illustration.   John  6: 26,  60,  66.  8:  30  etc.  Luke  14:  25  etc. 

12th  Illustration.  Luke  11:  53  etc.  (compare  v.  39—52).  20:  19 
(compare  v.  17,  18).  Matt.  15:  12—14  (comp.  v.  11).  22:  15— 
22. 

13th  Illustration.  Compare  Dissert.  III.  in  Libror.  N.  Test,  ali- 
quot locos,  p.  16.  (in  Opuscula  academica.  Vol.  III.  p.  209  etc.) 
where  it  is  remarked,  that  in  the  injunction  recorded  Mark  10:  12, 
Jesus  had  a  reference  to  nations  not  Jewish. 

14th  Illustration.  Although  the  plan  of  Jesus  embraced  every  na- 
tion on  earth,  yet  he  would  not  himself  commence  its  accomplish- 
ment among  the  heathen,  nor  suffer  his  disciples,  when  they  were 
first  sent  out,  to  go  among  the  heathen  or  Samaritans.  Matt.  10:  5 
etc.  15:  24.  comp.  John  10:  11—15. 

15th  Illustration.  Matt.  13:  37  etc.  o  di  dygog  iavtv  d  aoofiog  the 
field  is  the  world. 

16th  Illustration.  Matt.  13:  30,  39—43,  47—50. 

17th  Illustration.  See  Reinhard  "On  the  plan  which  the  founder 
of  the  christian  rehgion  devised  ;"  4th  ed.  1798. 

18th  Illustration.  Compare  Acts  5:  36,  and  Less,  On  Religion, 
Pt.  II.  p.  539. 

19th  Illustration.  See  the  Dissertation,  De  notione  regni  coeles- 
tis,  <^  II.  where  it  is  shown  from  passages  of  the  New  Testament, 
what  false  and  worldly  ideas  of  the  Messiah  and  of  his  kingdom, 
were  entertained  by  the  Jewish  people,  at  the  time  of  Jesus.  Com- 
pare Hess'  work  entitled,  "  The  doctrines,  actions  and  sufferings  of 
our  Lord,"  new  edit.  1805.  Pt.  I.  p.  387. 

20th  Illustration.  John  6:  15,  26  etc.  where  Jesus  opposes  the 
carnal  views  of  those  who  wished  to  make  him  king  because  he  had 
fed  them,  and  at  the  same  time  points  them  to  the  object  of  that 
miracle,  and  to  the  spiritual  nourishment  which  they  might  expect 
from  the  Messiah.^     In  Matt.  5:  3 — 12,  Jesus  endeavours  to  recti- 

1  See  Dissertat.   III.  in  Libror.  N.  Test,  histor.  aliquot  locos,  p.  42—46  (in 
Opusc.  academ.  Vol.  III.  p.  239  etc.) 


^  7.]  CREDIBILITY  OF  THE  DECLARATION  OF  JESUS.  109 

fy  the  current  opinions  of  the  Jews  relative  to  the  kingdom  of  God 
by  representing  the  happiness  of  this  kingdom  as  a  heavenly  hap- 
piness (v.  12),  as  a  union  with  God,  and  a  likeness  to  him  (v.  8,  9), 
as  a  freedom  from  moral  evil  (v.  6),  as  a  happiness  which  does  not 
remove  the  afflictions  of  the  present  life  (v.  4,  10,  11),  and  which 
can  be  attained,  not  by  force  and  by  overbearing,  but  by  meekness 
(v.  5),  humility  (v.  3),  and  a  pacific  disposition  (v.  9).^  Mark  9: 
9—13.  Luke  9:  43,  44.  14:25.  etc.  Matt.  20:  22—28.  Luke  19: 
11  etc.  where  Jesus  by  his  parable  (v.  12 — 27  )  contradicts  the  opin- 
ion, that  the  solemn  appearance  of  his  kingdom  was  very  near,  (v. 
11).  Luke  19:29 — 40.  compv.  41 — 44.  Here,  by  his  mourn- 
ful and  affecting  lamentation  over  the  impending  calamity  of  Jeru- 
salem, Jesus  gave  an  immediate  refutation  of  every  false  construc- 
tion, which  the  Jews  in  accordance  with  their  prejudices  concerning 
the  Messiah,  could  put  upon  his  entrance  into  their  city. 

21st  Illustration.   Matt.  16:  22,  23.  20:21.  Luke  9:  45.  18:34, 
31—33.   24:21. 


SECTION    VIII. 


Evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  professions  of  Jesus  continued, 

II.    FROM  HIS  MIRACLES. 

But  the  principal  evidence  for  the  divinity  of  the  mission  and 
doctrines  of  Jesus,  is  that  derived  from  those  deeds  of  his  which  are 
termed  miracles(  1,2).  As  these  miracles,  whose  historical  truth 
(3)  has  been  proved  («§>  5),  are  of  such  a  nature  that  they  could  not 
be  produced  by  human  art  (4),  or  be  a  mere  accidental  coincidence 
of  events  with  the  wishes  and  predictions  of  Jesus(5) ;  they  are 
occular  proofs  [arjfiila]  of  the  fact,  that  the  man  Jesus  who  pro- 
duced these  effects,  was  not  left  to  himself;  but  that  he  was  under 
the  influence  of  a  superior  Being,  and  of  that  very  Being  (6),  to 
whom  he  ascribed  all  his  declarations,  as  well  as  these  actions  of  his 
which  so  manifestly  transcended  all  human  power(7). 

'  See  Dissert.  1.  in  Lib.  N.  Test,  historicos,  p.  13,  14.  (Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  Ill 
p.  12  etc.) 


110  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  1. 

Illustration  1. 
On  the  signification  of  ^'gya,  miracles. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  in  some  passages,  egya  manifestly  signi- 
fies miracles.  Such  passages  are  Matt.  11:2  (compared  with 
V.  3—5).  Luke  7  :  18  (comp.  v.  U— 17).  John  9  :  3,  4  (comp  v. 
6,  7).  In  other  passages  in  which  egya  occurs,  the  evidence, 
though  not  so  clear,  favours  the  idea  of  miracles.  Thus  in  the  texts 
John  14:  11.  10:  37,38,25.  Both  these  passages  distinguish  be- 
tween believing  Jesus  on  his  own  word,  and  believing  him  for  his 
works'  sake,TiiaT£Viiv  uvim  and  niaisvfvv  diet  zd  i'gya  or  niaxiunv 
To7g  I'gyotg.  To  believe  Jesus  himself,  on  his  own  word,  cannot  well 
signify  any  thing  else,  than  to  beheve  him  because  he  was  a  credi- 
ble person, — to  believe  him  on  account  of  his  wisdom  and  upright- 
ness, or  for  the  sake  of  his  character.  For  how  could  Jesus  expect 
that  he  should  be  believed  merely  on  his  word,  without  any  regard 
to  his  character  ?  Now  believing  him  for  the  sake  of  his  worJcs, 
must  signify  something  else,  than  believing  him  on  his  word,  or  for 
the  sake  of  his  character ;  and  therefore  the  word  *(pya  does  not  re- 
fer to  his  character  and  general  conduct,  but  rather  to  his  miracles.* 

Again,  the  word  I'gya  must  signify  primarily  the  miracles  of  Jesus, 
in  the  two  passages  John  5 :  36.  15 :  24.  In  reference  to  the  first 
passage,  it  is  to  be  remarked,  that  the  whole  discourse  from  verse 
17  to  47,  was  occasioned  by  a  miracle,  the  healing  of  "  the  man 
who  had  an  infirmity  thirty  and  eight  years,"  on  the  Sabbath  day. 
And  the  fieiCova  tgya  greater  works,  of  which  Jesus  speaks  in  the 
context  (v.  20),  were  also  extraordinary  evidences  of  his  greatness, 
to  be  exhibited,  as  he  himself  informs  us,  partly  at  the  day  of  judg- 
ment (v.  22,  27 — 29),  and  partly  prior  to  his  death  (v.  25) ;  they 
consisted  in  raising  the  dead,  and  of  course  were  miracles.  With  re- 
gard to  the  second  passage,  it  is  evident  that  Jesus  meant  such 
works  as  were  open  to  the  view  of  all,  and  such  as  could  not  have 
escaped  their  knowledge  (v.  22,  25).^  Now  the  evidence  afforded 
by  his  miracles  in  favour  of  his  divine  mission,  was  precisely  such  as 
was  best  calculated  to  fix  their  attention  (John  9 :  30 — 33.  10 :  21. 
3  :  2),  and  it  therefore  rendered  the  Jews  the  less  excusable.  And 
as  the  populace  had  not  so  good  an  opportunity  to  become  intimate- 

1  See  the  author's  Dissertation  on  Matt.  17 :  27,  in  Flatt's  Mag.  Pt.  II.  note  60. 

2  The  declaration  of  Jesus  John  15:  24,  That  he  performed  before  the  eyes 
of  the  Jews  miracles  {i'qyo)  which  no  other  person  had  performed  {a  ovSsls  aXlos 
tnoiTjaav)y  was  perfectly  true  :  for  no  prophet  of  the  O.  T.  had  performed  so  many 
(John  21 :  25)  and  so  many  beneficent  miracles  itolkd  xaXd  i'^ya  (21 :  25),  as  he 
did.    See  the  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Vol.  II.  p.  84,  85.  note  60. 


^8.]  THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS.  Ill 

ly  acquainted  with  his  wisdom  and  integrity,  as  his  disciples  had  who 
were  constantly  with  him  ;  it  may  be  questioned  whether  Jesus 
would  have  required  them  to  acknowledge  him  as  that  exalted  Mes- 
senger of  God  which  he  professed  to  be,  merely  on  account  of  the 
excellence  of  his  doctrines  and  the  hohness  of  his  life  ;  unless  the 
suspicions  as  to  the  excellence  of  his  doctrines  and  life,  which  his 
professions  relative  to  the  exalted  dignity  of  his  person  would  natu- 
rally excite,  had  been  met  by  such  (w")  miracles,  as  were  no  less 
extraordinary  than  his  professions  concerning  the  dignity  of  his 
person.  1 

Several  interpreters  suppose  e()ya  in  the  aforementioned  passages 
of  John,  to  signify  the  official  acts  and  deeds  of  Jesus  as  the  Mes- 
siah. See  Morus'  Dissertation,  qua  describitur  testimonium  Dei 
Patris  de  filio  suo,  ad  Johan.  5  :  31 — 47.  Nilzsch's  Program  :  Quan- 
tum Christus  tribuerit  miraculis  ?  Paulus'  New  Theological  Journal 
Vol.  IX.  p.  370,  428.  and  Eckermann's  Theological  Contribu- 
tions, Vol.  V.  No.  2.  p.  76,  where  we  find  the  following  remark : 
"  egya  does  not  signify  miracles,  but  offices  of  instruction,  or  teach- 
ing men — the  proper  method  of  worshipping  God,  and  the  conditions 
on  which  his  favour  may  be  obtained  ;  in  order  to  their  improve- 
ment and  salvation."  See  also  Eichhorn's  Bibliotheca  of  Biblical 
Literature,  Vol.  VII.  p.  981,  where  the  expression  egya  is  taken  to 
be  .  synonymous  in  these  passages  with  dida^ri  (doctrines).  The 
principal  argument  of  these  writers  is  derived  from  John  14  :  10 — -12, 
and  is  answered  in  the  Dissert.  II.  in  Libr.  N.  T.  historicorum  ali- 
quot locos  p.  52 — 54.  (Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  III.  p.  151  etc.)  where 
it  is  shown,  (1),  that  Jesus  might,  with  the  greatest  propriety,  say 
(John  4 :  11),  that  on  account  of  his  miracles,  men  ought  to  believe 
him  to  be  united  with  God  in  the  most  intimate  manner ;  because 
these  very  miracles  proved  the  truth  of  his  declaration.  (2),  that 
the  12th  verse  may  be  thus  translated  i  "  whosoever  (among  you 
my  disciples)  believeth  in  me,  shall  perform  the  same  miracles  which 
I  perform  ;  and  he  shall  do  still  greater  things  [ftel^ova,  majores  res,) 
than  these  miracles  ;  (he  shall  be  more  successful  than  I  have  been, 
in  bringing  men  to  receive  my  doctrines). 

III.  2.  ProoJ  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  were  intended  as  evidence 
of  his  divine  mission;  and  refutation  of  the  contrary  opinion  of 
some  late  writers. 

Jesus  himself  explicitly  declared  his  miracles  to  be  proofs  of  the 
!  divinity  of  his  mission.  Thus,  to  the  disciples  of  John,  who  came  to 
!  him  with  the  interrogation,  "  Art  thou  he  that  should  come,  or  shall 

1  Corap.  sup.  cit.  p.  82,  83. 


112  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OP  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

we  expect  another,"  he  gave  this  most  unequivocal  reply  :  Uogiv- 
•QivTeg  unccyyeUazf  'Jwavvri  a  anoviis  xat  «  ^Xtmit'  TV(pXoi  ava^Xt- 
novat, — /u»i  anuvdahad^rj  iv  ifioi,  go  and  relate  to  John  the  things 
which  ye  have  heard  and  seen  :  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and 
the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf  hear,  the  dead 
are  raised,  and  good  news  is  brought  to  the  poor  ;  and  blessed  is  he 
to  whom  I  shall  not  prove  a  stumbling  block."  See  Matt.  11 :  3 — 5. 
John  14:  11.  10:25,  37  etc.  11:42.15:4.9:3—5.  In  the 
Dissert.  II.  in  libros  N.  T.  historicos,  it  is  proved  that  the  miracle 
of  healing  one  who  was  born  blind,  which  is  related  in  the  last  of 
these  texts,  and  to  which  Jesus  himself  attached  great  importance 
(v.  3  etc.),  had  a  remarkable  reference  to  his  declaration  concerning 
himself,  recorded  John  8:  12  etc. 

The  apostles  of  Jesus  also  declare,  that  the  establishment  of  the 
divinity  of  his  mission  and  of  his  personal  glory  (do'^a),  was  the  ob- 
ject of  his  miracles.  See  Acts  2  :  22.  John  2  :  11.  Heb.  2  :  3,  4. 
and  compare  Diss.  I.  in  libros  N.  T.  histor.  p.  83  etc.  where  it  is 
shown,  that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  by  no  means  discountenanced 
men's  believing  in  him  on  account  of  his  miracles  (John  4 :  48. 
Mark  8:11);  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  such  faith  was  recommend- 
-ed  not  only  to  the  eye-witnesses  of  the  miracles,  but  also  to  all  who 
should  even  read  the  accounts  of  them.  (John  20:  29 — 31). 

But  some  deny  that  Jesus  himself  declared  his  miracles  to  be 
proofs  of  his  divine  mission.  This  has  been  done  by  Eckermann 
and  others.  In  reply,  see  the  dissertation  of  the  author,  entitled, 
*•'  Did  Jesus  declare  his  miracles  to  be  proofs  of  the  divinity  of  his 
mission  ?"^  and  the  Programm  of  Dr.  Nitzsch  :  "  Quantum  Jesus  mi- 
raculis  tribuerit?"  published  Wittemburg  1796,  and  the  "  Remarks 
on  the  miracles  of  Jesus,"  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Pt.  III.  p.  20  etc. 

The  principal  objections  to  the  opinion  that  Jesus  himself  declar- 
ed his  miracles  to  be  proofs  of  the  divinity  of  his  mission  and  doc- 
trine, as  well  as  the  replies  to  these  objections,  are  the  following  : 

I.  Those  passages,  which  are  regarded  as  decisive  evidence  that 
Jesus  himself  declared  his  miracles  to  be  proofs  of  his  divine  mis- 
sion, did  not  (so  says  Eckermann)  proceed  from  Jesus  and  his 
'  apostles,  but  are  interpolations  of  later  date,  by  persons  fond  of  mi- 
racles, who  added  them  to  the  original  narratives  of  the  evangelists, 
and  ascribed  them  to  Jesus.  This  objection  has  already  been  re- 
futed in  ^  2.  111.  6. 

According  to  the  New  Theological  Journal,  however,  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  deny  the  integrity  of  these  passages,  for  they  can  easily 
be  so  explained  as  to  afford  no  evidence  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
referred  to  the  divinity  of  his  mission  and  doctrine.     Thus,  with 

1  In  FUtt's  Magazine,  pt.  IV.  No.  IV. 


^8.]  THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS.  118 


regard  to  1.  Matt.  11:  2 — 5.  "  Jesus  does  not  derive  the  evidence, 
from  the  miraculous  character  of  his  actions,  but  from  the  circum- 
stance, that  they  were  performed  in  a  manner  worthy  of  the  Mes- 
siah. John  the  Baptist  certainly  did  not  doubt  the  Messiahship  of 
Jesus  (v.  7),  and  his  disciples  believed  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah 
on  his  word  ;  whence  then  the  necessity  of  evidence  drawn  from  his 
miracles  ?  Moreover  Jesus  places  a  thing  which  was  not  miraculous, 
{nioiioL  evayyeXiCovTat,  glad  tidings  are  preached  to  the  poor,)  in  the 
same  connexion  with  the  miracles  which  had  been  mentioned  im- 
mediately before.  Probably  tlie  circumstance  that  Jesus  appeared 
to  be  too  tardy  in  the  execution  of  his  plans,  excited  some  solicitude 
in  the  minds  of  John  the  Baptist  and  his  disciples  ;  and  hence  Je- 
sus refers  them,  in  his  reply,  to  his  activity  as  the  Messiah." 

Reply  to  the  first  objection,  (a)  The  internal  dignity  with  which 
Jesus  acted,  was  not  visible  in  such  a  degree  as  to  authorize  the  be- 
lief merely  on  this  ground  (see  111.  1.  supra):  on  the  other  hand, 
the  miraculous  character  of  his  actions  must  have  arrested  the  at- 
tention of  all.  (b)  John  the  Baptist  may  have  had  reasons  enough 
for  wishing  that  the  belief  of  his  disciples  in  the  Messiahship  of  Je- 
sus, might  be  confirmed  by  a  more  intimate  acquaintance  with  him. 
John  3:  26.  Matt.  9:  14 — 17.  (c)  According  to  the  declaration  of 
Jesus,  the  m  toj  xoi  evayyiXi^ovrai,  was  itself  something  mi- 
raculous ;  inasmuch  as  Jesus  had  received  his  doctrines,  and  his 
commission  to  teach,  from  God  himself.  Besides,  it  was  a  part  of 
the  evidence  of  his  divine  mission  and  Messiahship.  (d)  Jesus 
mentions  exclusively  his  wonderful  works,  and  says  nothing  con- 
cerning his  other  good  deeds,  which  flowed  from  his  godlike  dispo- 
sition ;  nor  does  he  give  even  the  most  remote  intimation,  that  the 
works  which  he  mentioned,  were  to  be  viewed  only  in  reference  to 
their  moral  excellence. 

2.  In  the  passage,  John  11:  41,  42,  'iva  maTivabiaiv  oti  av  fis 
ccntateUag,  Jesus  does  not  appeal,  for  the  divinity  of  his  mission,  to 
the  miraculous  nature  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  but  to  his  resigna- 
tion to  the  divine  will,  which  was  evinced  by  his  audible  prayer."^ 
Reply,  (a)  Suppose  the  prayer  of  Jesus  had  not  been  succeeded 
by  the  miracle  of  Lazarus'  resurrection  ;  or  that  the  thing,  for  which 
Jesus  thanked  God  before  it  occurred,  had  not  been  miraculous ; 
could  his  mere  praying  aloud  to  God,  have  strengthened  the  con- 
viction, that  he  was  sent  by  God?  (b)But  Jesus  does  appeal  to  the 
miraculous  nature  of  the  resuscitation  of  Lazarus  :  for  he  says  to  his 
disciples  :  "  I  rejoice,  for  your  sakes,  that  I  was  not  present,  I'vu 
niGTfvarjTe,  i.  e.  that  ye  miglit  be  confirmed  in  your  conviction, 
John  11:15. 


1  New  Theological  Journal,  p.  424—426. 

15 


114  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

Note.  The  last  of  these  answers,  and  in  some  measure  also  the 
first,  will  likewise  serve  as  a  refutation  of  the  following  paraphrase 
given  by  Paulas,  of  the  42d  verse  :  "  On  account  of  the  surrounding 
populace,  1  foretold  the  event  which  now  fulfils  my  wishes,  in  order 
that  they  might  be  better  satisfied  that  1  undertook  my  mission  in 
obedience  to  thy  will ;  according  to  their  custom  of  judging,  that 
the  person  whose  beneficent  purposes,  are  successful,  must  enjoy 
the  favour  of  God." 

3.  Matt.  11:20  etc.  ''Jesus  ascribes  the  greater  guilt  to  the 
cities  here  mentioned,  because  they  disregarded  his  calls  to  repen- 
tance, and  not  because  they  were  unconvinced  of  the  divinity  of  his 
mission  by  the  miracles  which  he  performed."  Rejjli/,  Jesus  most 
evidently  does  represent  his  miracles  as  a  very  cogent  call  to  a 
moral  reformation  (v.  21 — 23.)  :  for  by  means  of  his  miracles,  a 
difl'erent  disposition  in  them  towards  him,  might  and  would  have 
been  produced  (v.  19)  ;  and  thence  a  moral  reformation  would  have 
followed. 

4.  Matt.  9:  2 — 6,  especially  v.  6.  "  The  idea  which  Jesus  here 
intended  to  convey,  is  merely  this  :  in  order  that  ye  may  see,  that 
I  am  both  able,  and  under  obligation,  to  remove  that  prejudice  so 
detrimental  to  convalescence,  that  diseases  are  the  punishment  of 
«ins."  Reply.  The  phrase  acfiami  ccftaQilag  cannot  signify,  to  de- 
clare it  a  groundless  prejudice,  that  diseases  are  the  punishment  of 
sins  ;  but  it  signifies,  either  to  remit  the  punishment  of  sins,  or  to 
announce  such  remission.  In  the  "  Observations  on  Matt.  9:  6, 
published  in  the  Tubing.  Magazine,  it  is  shown  that  in  the  6th  verse 
Jesus  appeals  to  his  miraculous  prediction  of  an  extraordinary  event, 
as  an  evidence  of  his  higher  authority,  or  of  a  higher  (divine)  com- 
mission. 

5.  Relative  to  the  passages  in  John,  in  which  the  word  egya  oc- 
curs, see  the  first  illustration  of  this  <§>. 

II.  "  There  are  passages  in  which  Jesus  expressly  declares,  that 
he  does  not  wish  the  belief  in  the.  divinity  of  his  mission,  to  be 
founded  on  miracles." 

Tiephj.  If  it  has  been  proved,  that  in  the  passages  cited  under 
objection  I,  Jesus  asserts  the  contrary  of  this ;  then  Jesus  either 
contradicts  himself,  which  cannot  be  supposed ;  or,  among  the 
possible  interpretations  of  these  passages,  those  must  be  inadmissible, 
from  which  such  a  contradiction  would  follow. 

But  these  passages  can  all,  without  the  least  violence,  be  in- 
terpreted in  such  a  manner,  as  by  no  means  to  contain  the  declara- 
tion, that  Jesus  did  not  wish  to  rest  the  belief  of  his  divine  mission 
on  miracles. 

(a)  Matt.  12:  38—42.  16:  1—4.  Mark  8:  11,  12.  Luke  11: 
29,  30.     In  all  these  passages,  Jesus  rejects  the  demand  of  him,  to 


i 


^  8.]  THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS.  115 

work  some  miracle,  atifiHov,  And  he  pronounces  those  who 
desired  the  miracles,  an  evil  generation  yfveav  nov7jQav,  A  very 
natural  paraphrase  of  these  texts  is  this :  "  How  can  these  persons 
demand  further  proof  of  the  divinity  of  my  mission,  since  they  have 
already  shown,  by  their  conduct  when  they  beheld  my  former  mira- 
cles (Matt.  9:  34.  12:  24),  that  they  are  not  to  be  convinced  by 
miracles,  and  therefore  not  by  the  new  ones  which  they  demand  ? 
Their  wishes  shall  not  be  gratified.  So  unreasonable  are  their  de- 
mands, that  no  sign  shall  be  given  them."  Although  the  contrary 
is  asserted  in  the  New  Theological  Journal,  yet  Jesus  actually  does 
(in  Matt.  16:  2,  3)  refer  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  to  the  mira- 
cles which  he  had  already  wrought.  For  the  ai^fiela  kov  natQotv^ 
the  signs  of  the  times  of  the  Messiah,  are  doubtless  miracles;  as 
miracles  are  declared  to  be  signs  of  the  times  of  the  Messiah,  by 
Christ  himself,  Matt.  11:  3—5.  In  Matt.  12:  40,  and  Luke  11: 
30,  he  refers  his  hearers  to  the  then  future  miracle  of  his  resurrec- 
tion, principally  because  that  would  most  sensibly  expose  their 
hatred  of  the  truth,  a  hatred  which  caused  the  death  of  Jesus,  and 
thus  gave  occasion  to  this  miracle.^  And  in  like  manner,  John  6: 
30,  Jesus  refers  the  Jews  who  desired  a  sign  of  him,  partly  to  mira- 
cles which  he  had  wrought  (v.  26),  and  partly  to  such  as  were  yet 
future  (v.  62),  and  which  would  evince  the  folly  of  their  worldly 
expectations  from  the  Messiah  (v.  26,  31).^  (b)  John  4:  48. ^ 
Even  if  it  were  admitted,  that  Jesus  intended  by  these  words  to 
convey  the  idea,  that  his  character  alone,  independently  of  his  mira- 
cles, entitled  him  to  credence  ;  he  would  not  thereby  deny,  that 
his  miracles  are  satisfactory  evidence  of  his  divine  mission. 

But  an  explication  more  accordant  with  the  context,  is  this  :  "  ye 
will  not  believe  in  miracles,  until  ye  have  seen  them  yourselves." 
Compare  Mark  8:  17—21.  Matt.  8:  10.  The  following  view  of 
this  passage  is  given  in  a  posthumous  dissertation  of  Seiler,  On  the 
remarkable  acts  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  i"*  '*  The  words  of  Jesus, 
Except  ye  see  signs  and  wonders,  ye  will  not  believe,  contain  not 
so  much  a  censure  of  the  desire  of  the  Jews  to  witness  miracles,  as 
a  condemnation  of  their  disbelief  of  the  power  of  Jesus  to  effect 
cures  at  a  distance  from  the  subject. — The  Jews  reposed  great 
confidence  in  the  imposition  of  the  hand  of  a  pious  person.  Audit 
is  probable  that  the  nobleman  wished  Jesus,  in  like  manner,  to  lay 

1  Compare  on  this  passage,  Symbb,  ad  illustranda  graviora  quaedam  Jesu  dicta 
in  evang.  Johanneo,  auctore  C.  C.  Flatt,  Pt.  I.  not.  14.  1807. 

2  See  Dissert.  I.  in  libros  N.  T.  historicos,  not.  141.  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  III.  p. 
85  etc. 

3  Flatt's  Mag.  sup.  cit.  p.  203  etc.  Compare  the  dissert.  I,  in  libror.  N.  T* 
historicorum  aliquot  locos,  p.  82 — 84.     Opusc.  academ.  Vol.  III.  p.  84  etc. 

4  Published  by  Rosenmallor,  Lcipsic,  1810.  p.  41. 


116  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bk.  I, 

his  hand  on  his  child,  which  was  "  at  the  point  of  death ;"  for 
hitherto  Jesus  had  given  no  example  of  his  power  to  cure  at  a  dis- 
tance." 

III.  "  Jesus  even  forbid  the  publication  of  his  miracles." 
Reply.   The  prohibition  of  Jesus  to  promulgate  his  miracles  was 

always  occasioned  by  some  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  time,  or 
of  the  persons  among  whom  the  miracles  were  performed.  He  was 
particularly  desirous  to  avoid  having  the  tide  Messiah  publicly  ap- 
plied to  himself,  to  which  his  miracles  might  give  occasion,  thereby 
awakening  temporal  expectations  in  the  minds  of  the  Jews.*  But, 
on  other  occasions,  he  himself  promoted  the  publication  of  his 
miraculous  works.  Mark  5:  19,  20.  Luke  8:  45 — 47. 

IV.  *'  The  idea  which  Jesus  had  of  miracles,  according  to  some 
of  his  own  declarations,  was  not  of  such  a  nature,  as  to  justify  the 
opinion,  that  he  could  have  wished  to  use  them  as  evidence  of  the 
divinity  of  his  mission." 

1.  "  Impostors  and  persons  of  the  basest  character,  or  at  least 
such  as  were  not  disciples  of  Jesus,  had,  according  to  the  declaration 
of  Jesus  himself,  the  power  of  performing  miracles.  Matt.  7:  22, 
23.  Mark  9:  38,39.  Matth.  24:  25.  Mark  13:  22."  Reply. 
The  two  former  of  these  passages,  refer  to  miracles  which  were 
performed  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  and  in  honour  of  him  ;  but  it  by 
no  means  follows,  that  they  were  intended  as  proofs  of  the  christian 
character  of  those  who  wrought  them.  (See  Illust.  3.)  The  two 
latter  passages  relate,  not  to  miracles  actually  performed,  but  merely 
to  such  as  were  promised  (dojGovni,  compare  "jns  Deut.  13:  2,  4.) 
On  one  of  these  texts,  (Matt.  24:  24,)  Hess  remarks:  "Jesus  does 
not  here  give  the  specific  criteria,  by  which  the  "  wonders"  of  those 
false  prophets  are  to  be  distinguished  from  genuine  miracles.  But 
the  nature  of  their  doctrines,  which  would  manifestly  possess  noth- 
ing of  a  divine  character,  should  secure  his  followers  against  the  im- 
posing aspect  of  their  wonders."^  It  is  an  undoubted  truth,  proved 
by  several  passages  of  holy  writ,  (such  as  2  Thess.  2:  9)  that  God 
does  permit  wonders  to  be  performed  by  superhuman  wicked  beings  ; 
but  these  can  always  be  detected,  by  the  immoral  object  for  which 
they  are  wrought. 

2.  "  It  is  evident  that  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  when  they  were 
first  sent  out  with  the  power  of  working  miracles,  entertained  many 
errors."  (Matt.  10:  1.)  Reply. — God  had  power  to  prevent  their 
intermixing  their  own  erroneous  opinions  with  the  doctrines  which 
they  taught. 


'  Compare  Hess'  Lelire,  Thatcn  und  Schicksale  unsers  Herrn,  neue   Aufl. 
1806,  Zweite  Halfle,  p.  450  etc. 
2  {Supra  cit.  p.  407  etc. 


<^  8.]  THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS.  I  17 

V.  "  Jesus  made  no  use  of  his  miracles,  as  evidence  of  his  divine 
mission,  in  those  cases  in  which  it  would  be  most  natural  that  he 
should  do  so."     Thus : 

1.  "  When  the  Sanhedrim  demanded  of  him,  '*  By  what  author- 
ity doest  thou  these  things  ?"  referring  to  his  conduct  in  the  temple 
(Matt.  21:  23)  ;  he  makes  no  appeal,  as  might  be  expected,  to  his 
miracles."  Reply.  The  demand  of  the  priests  was  merely  this  : 
Who  gave  you  authority  to  do  these  things  ?  and  not,  what  evidence 
of  your  authority  can  you  produce  ?  But  even  to  the  first  inquiry, 
no  direct  reply  was  necessary  ;  for  he  had  just  before  declared  him- 
self to  be  the  highest  messenger  of  God  (v.  15,  16),  and  had  con- 
firmed his  declaration  by  miracles  (v.  14,  15.  John  11:  41 — 48). 
Still  he  does  reply  indirectly,  to  the  question  urged  ;  inasmuch  as 
he  persists  in  accusing  his  enemies  of  obstinate  disobedience  to  the 
will  of  God,  notwithstanding  all  then:  ostentation  of  reverence  for 
the  supreme  being. 

2.  "  Thus  also,  in  John  7:  12,  compared  with  v.  20,  2?,  there 
was  the  most  urgent  necessity  for  an  appeal  to  his  miracles,  as  the 
decisive  evidence  of  the  divinity  of  his  mission  ;  but  there  is  no  ap- 
peal made  to  them  in  the  course  of  his  whole  address  v.  16 — 29." 
Reply,  The  question  advanced  in  the  15th  verse,  Jesus  answers 
in  the  16th,  and  adds  the  declaration,  that  he  derived  his  doctrines 
fi-om  God.  But  there  was  no  necessity  for  his  offering  proof  of  the 
truth  of  this  declaration  ;  because  proof  had  not  been  called  for ; 
and  because  at  this  same  feast,  he  had  explained  himself  fully  con- 
cerning the  proofs  of  his  divine  mission,  on  the  occasion  of  healing 
a  person  on  the  Sabbath  day  (chap.  5),  and  to  this  transaction  he 
refers  explicitly  in  the  present  discourse  (v.  22,  23). 

The  sense  of  the  passage  John  7:  17,  is  by  no  means  this : 
*^  whosoever  doth  the  will  of  God,  shall  be  able  to  discover,  from  the 
excellence  and  truth  of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  whether  they  are  of 
divine  origin  or  not."  Jesus  only  states  the  subjective  condition, 
on  which  a  conviction  of  the  divinity  of  his  doctrines  may  be  ob- 
tained, by  attending  to  the  evidences  which  he  points  out,  among 
which  are  his  miracles.^ 

It  may  be  remarked  generally,  in  reply  to  this  5th  objection,  that 
the  argument,  drawn  from  the  mere  silence  of  Jesus,  is  very  unsat- 
isfactory. It  is  sufficient,  that  the  Evangelists  state  some  general 
declarations  of  Jesus,  concerning  the  evidence  of  his  miracles ; 
there  was  no  necessity  for  their  being  often  repeated,  either  by  Je- 
sus or  by  his  evangelists. 

I  See  Dissert,  on  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Ft.  I.  p. 
107—109,  note  1. 


118  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK. 


III.  3.     The  accounts  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  are  riot  allegorical 
narratives,  hut  a  record  of  facts. 

The  truth  of  this  position  is  clearly  evinced,  not  only  by  the 
character  of  the  narrative  itself,^  but  principally  from  the  circum- 
stance, that  those  miracles  are,  in  other  passages,  presupposed  as 
historical  facts  (see  Matt.  11:  20—23.  27:  42.  Mark  6:  14,  52. 
8:  19,  20.  9:  28.  John  4:  45,  54.  6:  26.  10:  21.  11:  47.  12:  1, 
9 — 11.  Acts  2:  22).  Nay,  even  those  who  labour  to  transform  the 
miracles  of  Jesus  into  allegories,  admit  that,  at  least  some  of  them 
were  real  facts  f  though  they  assume,  that  these  miracles  were  the 
product  of  human  ingenuity  ;  an  assumption  wholly  gratuitous,  as 
shall  be  proved  in  the  sequel.  If,  as  Damm  supposes,  the  diseases 
which  Jesus  cured,  were  diseases  of  the  soul ;  how  could  these 
cures  expose  him  to  the  imputation  of  profaning  the  Sabbath  ?^  But 
does  not  the  fluctuation  of  the  interpretation  given  to  these  passa- 
ges, which  are  explained  sometimes  literally,  and  sometimes  alle- 
gorically,"*  naturally  excite  a  suspicion  as  to  the  correctness  of  such 
a  mode  of  interpretation  ?  Is  it  not  in  the  highest  degree  arbitrary, 
to  interpret  some  narratives  of  miracles,  as  mere  allegories,^  al- 
though they  present  not  a  single  characteristic  by  which  they  are 
distinguishable  from  others  which  are  admitted  to  be  literal  narra- 
tives of  facts  ?  Damm  himself  at  last  admits,  that  the  Evangelists 
intended  by  their  narratives,  to  convey  the  idea,  that  Jesus  actually 
did,  like  Moses,  perform  miracles,  in  order  the  more  easily  to  con- 
vince the  Jews  of  his  Messiahship.  But  the  moment  the  advocates 
of  this  hypothesis  admit,  that  the  Evangelists  intended  their  narra- 
tive of  miracles  should  he  understood  as  a  narrative  of  facts,  their 
hypothesis  necessarily  falls  to  the  ground.  For  it  must  be  readily 
admitted,  that  if  no  real  miracle  had  been  performed,  the  disciples 
of  Jesus,  so  far  from  convincing  the  Jews  of  the  truth  and  divinity 
of  Christ's  doctrines  by  their  account  of  his  miracles,  could  not  have 
persuaded  any  one  to  embrace  Christianity ;  on  the  contrary,  they 
would  have  crushed  their  own  cause  in  its  birth,  if  on  examination 
it  was  evident  to  all,  that  the  Evangelists  had  either  avoided  men- 
tioning the  natural  means,  by  which  those  wonders  had  been  effect- 
ed, or,  that  they  had  intentionally  framed  their  allegorical  tales  in  a 

1  Vide  Less,  Uber  die  Religion  etc.  Th.  II.  S.  281  etc. 

2  See  Damm  vom  Historichen  Glauben,  Th.  II.  S.  48,  52. 

3  Malt.  12: 10  etc.     Luke  13;  14—17.  14:  1—3.  John  5:  9—18.  7:  21—23. 
^  See  p.  Qd,  and  also  p.  23  etc.  of  Damm,  sup.  cit.  5  Ibid.  p.  52 


•5>  8.]  THE  ^flRACLES  OF  JESUS.  119 

manner  to  delude  their  readers  into  the  false  opinion  that  they  were 
accounts  of  real  miracles  (compare  <J  5.  111.  7  supra). ^ 

III.  4.     Further  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  : 
they  were  not  the  product  of  human  ingenuity. 

In  attempting  to  account  for  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  it  would  be 
unwarranted  to  attribute  them  to  the  use  of  ingenious  machinery  and 
other  means  of  delusion  ;  such  as  are  presupposed  by  the  hypothe- 
sis,^ "  that  Christ  learned  the  art  of  working  miracles  from  some 
mystagogues,  but  having  the  impression  that  they  could  not  be  per- 
formed without  a  peculiar  influence  of  God,  he  declared  them  to  be 
the  works  of  God  himself."  For  these  miracles  were  by  no  means 
confined  to  one  specific  mode  of  operation,  but  were  of  very  differ- 
ent kinds.  (1)  Jesus  cured  all  kinds  of  diseases,  i'&fgansvojv  naaav 
vooov  xat  naoav  fiuXaxlav, — noixUaig  voaoig  aal  ^aoapoig  avveyo- 
fAtvovg),  Matt.  4:  23,  24.  11:  4,  5.  (2)  He  raised  the  dead,  Mark 
5:  35  etc.  John  14:  21.  Luke  7:  11—17.  (3)  He  fed  thousands 
in  a  miraculous  manner,  John  6:  15 — 25.  Matt.  14:  15 — 21.  15: 
32—38.  (4)  He  walked  on  the  sea,  Matt.  14:  25.  (5)  He  con- 
trolled the  winds  and  waves,  Mark  4:  35 — -39.  (6)  He  procured 
for  Peter  an  extraordinary  draught  of  fishes,  Luke  5:  4 — 7.  (7) 
He  procured  for  Peter  a  stater  from  the  fish's  mouth.  Matt.  17:  27. 
(8)  He  displayed  an  acquaintance  with  future  contingencies,  John 
1:  49,  50.  4:  17—19,  29.  (9)  He  converted  water  into  wine, 
John  2:  I — 11  .^  Again,  in  the  performance  of  his  miracles,  he  was 
not  confined  to  any  particular  place,  which  might  afford  him  facili- 
ties for  deception  ;  but  Jerusalem,  the  temple,  entire  Galilee,  the 
most  remote  towns  and  villages,  all  witnessed  the  displays  of  his 
miraculous  power  ;  and  some  diseased  persons,  he  healed  even  with- 
out seeing  them."^  Morever,  in  all  his  proceedings,  Jesus  acted  un- 
der the  constant  inspection^  of  men  of  acute  discernment,  his  bitter 


1  In  many  of  the  cures  performed  by  Jesus,  it  would  be  unreasonable  even  to 
think  of  the  use  of  natural  means.  Such  are  those  recorded  in  John  4:  50 — 53. 
Luke  7:  6—9.  Mark  7:  30.  See  the  Programma  of  Seiler,  1795  :  "  An  Christus 
in  operibus  suis  mirabilibus  efficiendis,  arcanis  usus  est  remediis.?"  That  the  use 
which  Jesus  made  of  natural  means  in  some  few  of  his  cures,  is  no  evidence 
against  his  miracles,  is  proved  by  Hess,  in  his  "  Lehre,  Thaten  uud'  Schicksale 
Jesu,"  Pt.  II.  p.  396  etc.  454  and  by  Krummacher,  in  his  work  "  On  the  spirit 
and  form  of  the  Gospel  history,  §  96.  Leipsic,  1805.  See  also  Seiler,  sup.  cit. 
47  etc. 

2  Eckermann's  "  Theol.  Contributions,"  Vol.  III.  No.  2.  p.  179  etc.  Compare 
Flatt's  Magaz.  No.  I.  p.  93.  3  Comp.  Mag^.  St.  14.  S.  73—91. 

4  See  John  2:  23.  4:  45.  Matt.  21:  14.  4: 23.  9:  35.  Mark  6:  56.  John  4:  50  etc. 
Matt.  8:  8—13. 

5  Malt.  9:  3-8,  34.  21:  14,  15.  Luke  6:  7—11.  13:  10—17.  14:  1—6.  John  11: 
46.  6:  22—26, 42—66.  18:  6. 


120  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.         [bK.  I. 

enemies,  and  who  scrutinised^  his  conduct  with  the  greatest  atten- 
tion. In  the  person  of  Judus,  he  was  attended  by  a  constant  spy,^ 
whose  observation,  no  apparatus,  even  of  the  most  secret  nature, 
could  have  escaped.*^  Yet  who  can  doubt,  that  if  Judas  had  known, 
or  even  suspected,  the  miracles  of  Jesus  to  be  mere  delusions,  he 
would  have  felt  less  poignancy  of  regret  for  having  betrayed  him  }"* 
And,  by  the  discovery  of  an  imposture,  had  any  existed,  he  would 
have  rendered  to  the  Jews  a  very  acceptable  service,  and  have  se- 
cured no  inconsiderable  advantages  to  himself.^ 

Nay,  miracles  were  performed  on  the  authority  of  Jesus,  and  in 
reliance  on  him,  by  some  persons,^  who,  though  they  regarded  him 
as  a  divine  messenger  of  an  exalted  character,  yet  had  no  thought 
of  conforming  their  life  and  conduct  to  the  precepts  which  he  taught, 
and  who  did  not  ever  attach  themselves  to  his  followers,  but  remain- 
ed among  the  Pharisees.  Nor  is  it  strange,  that  God  should  per- 
mit them  to  succeed  in  such  attempts ;  for  the  cause  of  Jesus  could 
not  fail  to  derive  great  advantage  from  them  ;  and  the  slanders  of  his 
enemies  were  repelled  in  the  most  convincing  manner,  by  the  fact 
that  even  the  very  friends  of  the  slanderers  could  not,  in  conse- 
quence of  their  own  experience,  justify  their  accusations."^  Moreo- 
ver, by  what  kind  of  ingenious  deception,  could  Jesus,  when  h©  was 
dead,^  have  been  restored  to  life  ?  For,  that  he  actually  did  arise 
from  the  dead,^  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt,  by  the  testimony  of  the 
various  witnesses  with  whom,  as  the  Acts  of  the  apostles  informs  us, 
he  had  frequent  and  various  intercourse^  after  his  resurrection  ;  be- 
sides, it  would  be  impossible  to  account,  in  a  rational  manner,  for 
the  report  and  belief  of  his  resurrection,  the  existence  of  which  is 
admitted, ^^  unless  on  the  supposition  that  the  report  itself  was  true. 
Indeed  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  were  witnesses  of  his  resurrec- 
tion,^^ required  some  strong  evidence  of  the  successful  issue  of  their 
cause,  in  order  to  inspire  them  anew  with  confidence  and  courage  ; 
for  they  had  been  greatly  depressed^^  by  the  execution  of  their 
teacher,  and  were  not  prepared  to  expect  any  miracle,^^  and  least 
of  all,  the  miracle  of  his  resurrection.  Moreover,  we  cannot  con- 
ceive how  the  apostles  could  have  wrought  the  many  miracles  of  a 

I  John  5:  10  etc.  9:  13  etc.  11:  47.  Matt.  8:  4.  2  John  6:  70.  13:  18. 
3  Matt.  10:  14,  8.  Mark  6:  13,  30.                   4  Matt.  27:  3,  5. 

5  John  11:  47  etc.  12:  19.  Matt.  26:  59,  60, 15.    Compare  Less  Uber  die  reli- 
gion. II  Band,  S.  304—309. 

6  Mark  9:  38,  39.  Matt.  12:  27.  corap.  7:  22.  1  Cor.  13:  2. 

7  Mark  9:  39.  Matt.  12:  27.  8  John  19:  33.  Mark  15:  44  etc. 

9  1  Cor.  15:  5—7.  Acts  1:  3.  10:  40:  13:  31. 

10  1  Cor.  15:  11,  12.  Acts  2:  32.  3:  15.  4:  2,  33.  Coinp.  §  5.  111.  6. 

II  Acts  1:  22.  1^  Luke  24:  20.  John  20: 19,  26. 
13  John  6:  5—9.  Mark  6:  51,  52.  8:  17—21. 


§  8.]  THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS,  121 

public  nature,^  which  they  did,^  by  the  authority  and  power  of  the 
risen  Jesus,  that  illustrious  worker  of  miracles,  and  the  truth  of 
which  even  their  enemies  were  unable  to  deny,^  if  we  suppose  that 
they  were  left  to  their  own  strength,  and  consequently  were  either 
enthusiasts  or  impostors.  We  are,  therefore,  constrained  to  yield 
our  assent  to  the  account  which  they  themselves  give,  that  God 
himself  had  bestowed  on  them  the  power  of  working  miracles ;  in 
order  that  they  might  be  able  to  give  their  hearers  occular  proof  of 
the  truth  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  ;^  and  in  order  to  convince 
their  hearers  that  it  was  in  obedience  to  the  will  of  God,^  that  they 
published  the  illustrious  fact,  of  which  they  were  themselves  wit- 
nesses, having  seen  him  alive,^  and  the  promulgation  of  which  his 
enemies  would  not  tolerate.'^  Even  the  enemies  of  Jesus  were  un- 
able to  suppress^  the  fact  of  his  resurrection,  which  was  so  hateful  in 
their  sight  f  nay,  so  improbable  did  they  consider  the  falsehood 
which  they  themselves  had  fabricated,  that  they  did  not  even  at- 
tempt to  convict  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  of  misstating  facts,  but  in 
the  trial  resorted  to  every  other  subterfuge.^^  And  they  did  not 
even  dare  to  institute  an  examination  of  the  watchmen,  to  whose 
custody  the  grave  of  Jesus  had  been  committed  'M  although  such 
an  examination  would  have  been  the  most  certain  method  of  effect- 
ing the  total  overthrow  of  Christianity,  if  they  could  have  establish- 
ed the  charge  of  imposture,  which  they  had  alleged  against  the 
apostles.  And  if  Christianity  could  have  been  clearly  proved  an 
imposition,  would  it  not  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  any  person  should 
persist  in  defending  it,  at  the  expense  of  so  many  sacrifices  ?  Now, 
as  such  multitudes  were  ready  to  profess  their  friendship  for  the 
christian  cause,  and  to  advocate  its  interests  against  every  enemy 
(see  *^  5.  Illust.  7)  ;  it  must  necessarily  follow,  that  the  charge  of 
imposture  cannot  be  established. 

III.  5.     The  miracles  of  Jesus  were  not  the  result  of  mere  coinci- 
dence of  circumstances  with  his  wishes  and  predictions. 

This  is  evident  from  Matt.  8:  3,  8,  9,  12.      Mark  7:  34  etc. 

1  Acts  2:  43.  5:  12, 15.  2  Acts  3:  6,  16.  4:  7, 10,  30. 

3  Acts  4:  14, 16,  21.  5:  17.  18, 16.  4  Acts  5:  30,  32. 

5  Acts  4:  19.  5:  29,  32. 

6  Acts  10:  40—42.  4:  20.  Compare  the^Programm  on  1  Tim.  3:  16,  (publish- 
ed in  1788),  p.  14  etc.  where  the  words  ojcpd^rj  dyytXocg,  [in  the  authorised  ver- 
sion, "  seen  of  angels"],  are  explained  as  referring  to  the  disciples  of  Christ  to 
whom  he  appeared. 

7  Acts  4:  17  etc.  5:  28.  8  Matt.  28:  11  etc. 

9  Acts  4:  1—43, 18.  5:  17—50.     Compare  Matt.  27:  64. 

10  Acts  4:  17,  18,  21.  5;  27  etc.  33:  44.     Compare  Seiler,  sup.  cit.  p.  26.         : 
?l  Matt.  28:  14. 

16 


122  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.   U 

Luke  7:  14  etc.  18: 42  etc.  John  4:  50—53.  1 1 :  41 — 44,  in  vvhiGli 
passages,  we  have  an  account  of  the  cleansing  of  a  leper,  the  cure 
of  the  centurion's  servant,  and  that  of  the  man  deaf  and  dumb,  the 
raising  of  a  widow's  son  from  the  dead  at  Nain,  the  restoring  of  sight 
to  the  bhnd  beggar  near  Jericho,  the  cure  of  the  nobleman's  son  at 
Capernaum,  and  the  resuscitation  of  Lazarus.  Those  miracles  also 
which  Jesus  wrought  without  giving  notice  of  his  intention  to  per- 
form them  (such  as  those  of  Luke  8:  43  etc.  6:  19.  See  also  Acts 
5:  15.  19:  12),  were  nevertheless  dependent  on  his  will ;  inasmuch 
as  the  confirmation  of  his  divine  mission,  to  which  he  continually  laid 
claim  and  to  substantiate  which  he  wrought  all  his  other  miracles, 
was  the  great  object  for  which  God  accomplished  the  miraculous 
cure  of  those  diseased  persons.  And  besides,  those  persons  who 
sought  relief  from  Jesus,  were  led  to  expect  it,  by  the  miracles  which 
he  had  before  voluntarily  wrought ;  and  their  hope  was  evidently 
grounded  on  the  declaration,  which  Jesus  had  so  often  made  and 
confirmed  by  miracles,  that  he  acted  under  the  influence  of  divine 
power,  and  that  he  was  the  individual  whom  God  wished  exclusive- 
ly to  exhibit  as  his  greatest  messenger.  Now,  as  the  expectation 
of  the  diseased  was  realized,  God  himself  justified  that  expectation 
by  the  miracle,  and  thereby  confirmed  the  declaration  of  Jesus  on 
which  it  was  founded,  namely,  that  he  was  in  intimate  union  with 
God.  The  confidence,  which  these  persons  reposed  in  Jesus  as  a 
distinguished  messenger  of  God,  was  coincident  with  and  justified 
the  expectation  which  Jesus  himself  frequently  expressed,  that  every 
necessary  evidence  would  be  given  to  substantiate  the  divinity  of 
his  mission.  Moreover,  Jesus  himself  occasionally  stated,  that  the 
restoration  of  those  who  merely  touched  him,  was  in  accordance 
with  his  will,  Mark  6:  56.  And  if  we  suppose,  that  in  some  cases, 
when  Jesus  was  not  thinking  of  a  miracle,  God  wrought  a  miracle, 
in  order  to  satisfy  expectations  which  Jesus  had  aimed  to  excite  by 
his  doctrines  and  miracles  ;  this  would  only  prove,  the  more  demon- 
strably, that  the  object  of  God  accorded  perfectly  with  the  purpose 
of  Jesus,  which  was,  to  establish  the  divinity  of  his  mission.^ 

III.  6.      The  miracles  of  Jesus  are  therefore   conclusive  evidence, 
that  he  acted  under  the  infiuence  of  God. 

See  the  following  passages:  John  11:  11 — 15.  Matt.  27 :  63. 
Luke  24:  6,7.2  9:1,2,6,10.   10:9,17.  John  14:  12.     If  Jesus 

1  See  Michaelis'  Anmerkung  zu  Ap.  Gesch.  XIX.  12. 

2  See  SUskind's  "  Dissertation  on  the  predictions  of  Jesus  relative  to  his  own 
fesurrection  ;"  and  "  Remarks  on  the  question,  Did  Jesus  distinctly  predict  his 
resurrection  .?"  in  Flatt's  Mag.  Vol.  VJl.  p.  181— '->2C.  and  also  G.  C.  Flatt.  Symbb. 
ad  illustranda  jrravioraquaedam  Jesu  dicta  iaEvanjjelio  Johanneo,  Pt.  I.  p.  1 — 8. 
Pt.  II.  p.  17-20,  26. 


^  8.]  THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS.  123 

had  performed  only  one  miracle  which  accorded  with  his  wish  and 
prediction,  this  might  be  ascribed  to  accident.  But  the  very  pos- 
sibility of  this  being  the  uniform  fact,  is  precluded  by  the  great  mul- 
titud-e  of  his  miracles  recorded  in  Scripture,  of  some  of  which  only  a 
general  statement  is  made,^  as  well  as  by  the  nature  of  his  miracu- 
lous acts.^  And  this  evidence  receives  additional  strength,  frc«n  a 
consideration  of  the  particular  reference  which  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
had  to  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  who  appealed  to  those  miracles 
for  the  divinity  of  his  mission.^  These  miracles  are  therefore  de- 
monstrations of  the  exalted  nature  (the  divinity'^)  of  Jesus,  which 
the  Gospel  asserts,  and  of  his  destination  to  be  the  redeemer  of  men 
from  the  consequences  of  their  sin,  John  10 :  32,  xaXa  egya  benefi- 
cent mii*acles.  Acts  10  :  38,  dtril&ev  tvegye-cwv  he  went  about 
doing  good.  Matt.  9  ;  5  etc.  8  :  17  (from  Is.  53  :  4),  ocmoSTagaa- 
&svilag  i^fiwp  i7.a^€j  xctl  rccg  voaovg  i^aaiaasv^  he  hath  himself 
taken  away  our  infirmities,  and  borne  our  diseases. 

In  the  passage  of  Isaiah,  the  removal  of  the  punishment  of  our 
sins,  by  the  death  of  Jesus,  is  the  subject  of  discussion ;  but  the  pun- 
ishments of  sin  are  represented  figuratively,  as  diseases  and  pains^ 
in  order  also  to  remind  us  of  the  miraculous  cures  of  Christ ;  because 
it  was  by  the  cure  of  bodily  diseases  and  pains,  by  a  miraculous 
power,  that  the  Messiah  was  to  prove  that  he  had  come  into  the 
world  for  the  purpose  of  removing  the  consequences  ofsin.^ 

III.  7.  God  must  have  been,  ultimately,  the  author  of  the  miracles 
of  Jesus,  even  if  he  acted  through  the  instrumentality  of  a  supe- 
rior angel. 

If  it  must  be  admitted  that  Jesus  was  aided  by  a  superhuman 
being,  then  the  main  point  on  which  the  truth  of  his  declarations  de- 

1  Matt.  15:  30,  31.  Mark  1:  34.  3:  7—11.  6:  13,  54—56.  Luke  6:  17—19.  7:  21. 
John  20:  30. 

2  See  Flatt's  Beitrage  zur  christ.  Dog.  und  Moral,  p.  33  etc.  1792.  And  the 
aiithor's  dissertation,  "  Did  Jesus  declare  his  miracles  to  be  a  proof  of  his  divine 
mission  ?"  in  Flatt's  Mag.  Vol.  IV.  p.  182—186,  and  Bogue's  Essay  on  the  di- 
vine authority  of  the  New  Test.  p.  130.  etc. 

3  John  5:  36,  37.  10:  25,  37  etc.  14:  11.  15:  24.  Matt.  11:  3—5.  John  2:  18—22. 
Comp.  Matt.  ^:  61.  27:  40.  Compare  111.  2. 

4  John  U:  4,  13—25.  5:  20,25.  1:  14,  51,  52.  2:  11.,  {tipavl^oias rrjv So^av avxov 
[displayed  his  glory]  vide  Mag.  Vol.  14,  p.  79  etc.)  Malt.  8:  27.  Acts  3: 6, 12, 13. 
compare  2  Pet.  1:  16—18. 

5  See  the  Dissertation  on  the  object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  in  the  Comment,  on 
the  Hebrews,  p.  481  etc.  John  5:*24  etc.  11:23—26.  He  that  shall  raise  the 
dead  at  the  latter  day,  has  raised  some  even  in  this  life,  1  Cor.  15:  20 — 26.  Matt. 
12:  28.  Compare  §  51.  See  on  this  subject,  Hess,  aber  die  Lehren.  Thaten  und 
Schicksale  unseres  Herrn.  S.  368  etc.  Geschichte  der  drey  letzten  Lebensjahre, 
Band  2.  Einleit.  S.  XXVII.  and  Koppen's  "  The  Bible  the  Product  of  Divine 
Wisdom,"  Pt.  2.  p.  234  etc. 


124  I5IVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.         [bK.  f» 


pends,  and  which  alone  could  be  involved  in  doubt,  is  cleared  of  all 
difficulty.  For  it  can  now  no  longer  be  doubtful,  who  the  being  was^ 
by  whom  Jesus  was  enabled  to  produce  those  effects ;  whether  that 
aid  was  afforded  by.  means  of  a  particular  constitution  of  the  powers 
of  nature  in  the  original  creation,  or,  as  is  far  more  probable,*  by  an 
immediate  influence  on  nature  itself,  at  the  time  when  those  mira- 
cles were  wrought.  No  reason  can  be  assigned,  why  the  Being, 
under  whose  influence  Jesus  acted,  should  not  have  been  that  being 
(God)  which  Jesus  himself  stated.  Certainly  no  one  had  a  better 
opportunity  to  know  who  the  being  was,  than  Jesus,  who  was  sup- 
ported by  him  in  a  supernatural  manner,  who  was  in  intimate  union 
with  him,  and  therefore  had  a  better  opportunity  to  know  him,  than 
any  other  could  have.  And  should  any  one  be  disposed  to  adopt 
the  gratuitous  and  arbitrary  assumption,  that  the  author  of  the  mira- 
cles and  doctrines  of  Jesus,  was  some  other  being  than  God  himself; 
that  being  could,  at  least,  not  have  been  an  evil  spirit,  an  enemy  to 
God  and  man.  Even  the  very  nature  of  those  miracles,^  and  of  the 
doctrines'"*  which  were  substantiated  by  thern,  forbids  such  a  suppo- 
sition :  for  those  doctrines,  whether  true  or  not,  confessedly  breathe 
a  spirit  of  reverence  to  God,  and  would,  even  by  the  confession  of 
our  enemies,'^  secure  to  Christians  the  most  important  advantages, 
if  they  entertained  a  higher  regard  for  them.  Now,  an  evil  spirit 
would  have  endeavoured  to  promote  the  cause  of  wickedness  f  and, 
though  arrayed  in  the  garb  of  an  angel  of  light,^  would  have  betray- 
ed his  real  character,  by  the  prosecution  of  such  plans  as  are  con- 
genial to  his  nature.  A  good  spirit,  on  the  other  hand,  being  filled 
with  reverence  for  God,  would  never  have  lent  his  aid  to  Jesus,  un- 
less God  commanded  him  to  do  it ;  and  he  certainly  would  not  have 
urged  Jesus  to  assert  a  falsehood  in  the  name  of  God  (I  Cor.  15  : 
15),  and  falsely  to  profess  that  God  was  the  author  of  his  miracles 
and  doctrines,  when,  in  fact,  he  was  not  acting  by  divine  authority, 
but  on  the  authority  and  by  the  aid  of  merely  a  spirit  of  higher  rank. 
If  we  suppose  that  higher  spirit  acting  by  the  command  of  God, 
enabled   Jesus  to  perform  his  miracles  ;  it  will  then  follow,  that  in 

>  Compare  §  36.  111.  1.  and  the  author's  dissert,  on  Matt.  17:  27,  in  Flatt's 
Mair.  Vol.  II.  p.  57 — 62  .particularly  note  11,  and  Seller,  On  the  remarkable  acts 
of  Jesus  and  the  Apostles,  p.  72 — 84. 

2  Malt.  12:  24— 29.  Acts  10:  38.  Comp.  Hess,  "  On  the  doctrines  and  acts  of 
our  Lord,"  p.  365  etc.  (  new  edit.  2d  pt.  p.  390). 

3  Compare  Tubing.  Mag.  No.  1.  p.  96,  97,  98.  No.  2.  p.  163—191. 

4  2  Thess.  2:  9—11.  v.  4.  Rev.  13:  2,  4,  6, 13. 

5  On  the  possibility  and  credibility  of  miracles,  compare  the  Tab.  Mag.  No.  1, 
p.  90.  No.  3.  Pt.  II.  No.  8.  p.  152.  Cr'dfFe,  de  miraculorum  natura  philosophiae 
principiis  non  contradicente.  Helmstadt,  1797,  and  the  same  author's  "Philo- 
sophical vindication  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles." 

6  2  Cor.  11:  14, 3.    Comp.  Gen.  3: 5. 


4>  9.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  125 

communicating  his  doctrines,  Jesus  acted  in  accordance  with  the 
will  of  that  God,  by  whose  command  the  angel  enabled  him  to  per- 
form works  far  transcending  the  powers  of  human  nature,  in  order 
to  confirm  the  divine  origin  of  those  doctrines. 

It  cannot  be  supposed,  that  if  God  wished  to  instruct  the  children 
of  men  through  the  medium  of  a  superior  spirit,  he  would  select  a 
spirit  who  was  not  qualified  for  the  undertaking.  (Compare  «§>  36. 
lilust.  3,  infra.)  It  would  be  superfluous,  in  this  place,  to  enter 
into  an  investigation  of  the  possibility  of  miracles,  as  we  are  com- 
pelled by  the  constitution  of  our  nature,  to  admit  as  possible,  that 
which  is  demonstrated  by  facts.^ 

Finally,  Jesus  himself  expressly  ascribes  his  miracles  to  God ; 
John  9:  3.  11:  41,  42.  4:  40.  14:  10.  5:  19,  20,  36.  10:  25,  32, 
37.  6:  27.  And  the  apostles  of  Jesus,  in  like  manner,  attribute 
his  miracles  to  the  same  power;  Acts  2:  22.  10:  38.  1  John  5:  9, 
fiuQTVQia  ^iov  is  the  testimony  which  God  bore  concerning  Jesus, 
by  so  many  miracles. 

— 


SECTION  IX. 

The  divine  authority  of  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles. 

The  Lord  Jesus,  whose  words  were  all  uttered  under  divine  in- 
fluence (<5>  6,  7,  8),  commissioned  all  the  apostles  whom  he  had 
chosen, (1)  with  the  single  exception  of  Judas,  the  traitor,(2)  to 
promulgate  and  propagate(3)  those  doctrines  which  he  had  himself 
taught.  From  their  discharge  of  this  commission,  he  anticipated 
the  happiest  results{4)  ;  not  only  because  the  apostles  had  been  his 
companions,(5)  and  had  been  instructed  in  his  doctrines,  and  had 
been  eyewitnesses  of  his  miracles,(6)  but  because  he  depended 
principally  on  the  agency  of  God  (John  17:  11 — 15),  who  would, 
by  various  aid,  supply  the  absence  of  Jesus  who  had  hitherto  been 

Compare  "  Annotationes  ad  philosophicam  Kantii  de  religione  doctrinam,  § 
35,  p.  70,  and  in  the  German  translation  Tab.  1794,  p.  91.  Jung,  in  his  "  Urania 
for  the  head  and  the  heart,"  edited  by  Ewald,  1793.  Vol.  IV.  No.  1.  p.  258—289. 
Fichte's  Critique  on  Revelation,  §  7.  Staudlin's  Critical  Essay  on  the  christian 
system  of  religion,  §  48.  Critical  estimate  of  the  protestant  doctrinal  system, 
according  to  the  principles  of  religious  criticism,  1st  supplement,  p.  12.  The 
arguments  by  which  the  author  of  the  last  mentioned  work  endeavors  to  prove 
that  we  can  never  be  convinced  of  the  truth  of  miracles,  are  refuted  in  Flatt's 
Beitrage  zur  Dogmatic  and  Moral,  S.  60  etc.  h. 


126  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

their  friend  and  instructor ;  and  in  his  stead,  give  them  another  sup- 
porter, who  would  never  abandon  them,  John  14:  16,  17,  and  would 
perfectly  qualify  them  for  the  discharge  of  their  official  duties,  Acts 
1:  8.  Luke  24:  48,  49.  Thus  the  personal  agency  of  the  apostles 
was  by  no  means  dispensed  with,  in  the  performance  of  their  du- 
ties; (7)  but  they  were  required  to  combine  (John  15:  26,27)  those 
instructions  which  should  be  given  them  by  their  constant  and  ex- 
alted guide,  with  what  their  own  knowledge  and  ability  supplied., 
Jesus  assured  them,  that  the  "  Spirit  of  truth,"  to  nvsvfia  jtjg  dX^j- 
'&iiag,  John  14:  17,  who  perfectly  coincided  with  him  and  his  Fa- 
ther, (8)  would  bring  to  their  recollection,  all  those  words  of  his 
which  they  might  have  forgotten,  as  often  as  such  recollection  should 
be  necessary  to  the  discharge  of  their  official  duties  ;(9)  that  he 
would  correct  their  knowledge  of  the  things  they  had  imperfectly 
comprehended,  and  would  communicate(lO)  to  them,  all  necessary 
knowledge,  not(ll)  excepting  a  knowledge  of  the  future  and  secret 
things,  which  they  could  not  obtain(12)  by  natural  means.  And 
hence  it  follows,  that  when  in  some  of  their  communications,  their 
invisible  and  constant  instructor,  o  nctgccaXrjzog ^[13)  brought  nothing 
to  their  recollection,  but  left  them  to  use  their  natural  ability  and 
knowledge ;  those  communications  were  really  sanctioned  by  the 
Spirit  of  truth.  According  to  the  certain  declaration  of  Jesus,  there- 
fore, we  are  to  view  all  the  doctrines  of  his  apostles  as  the  doctrines 
of  that  Spirit  of  truth,(14)  under  whose  immediate  guidance  they 
always  discharged  their  official  duties ;  and  we  are  bound,  at  the 
risk  of  certain  punishment,  to  attach  to  them  divine  authority,(15) 
(Mark  16:  15.  6:  11).  Nor  have  we  any  reason  to  fear,  that  the 
apostles  might  have  neglected  to  treasure  up  in  their  memory  with 
sufficient  care,  those  declarations  of  Jesus  which  regarded  them- 
selves, as  they  had  occasion  so  frequently,  even  in  the  commence- 
ment of  their  apostleship,  to  recall  those  declarations,  and  to  com- 
pare them  with  their  own  experience. 

111.  1.     The  selection  of  the  apostles  by  Jesus. 
This  is  recorded  Mark  13:  13—19.  Compare  Acts  1:  2—13. 

III.  2.     The  exception  of  Judas  the  traitor. 
During  his  last  addresses  to  his  disciples,  Jesus  always  expressed 


•J  9.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OP  THE  APOSTLES.  127 

himself  with  reserve,  as  long  as  Judas  was  amongst  them,  John  13: 
10,  17 — 19 ;  but  as  soon  as  Judas  was  gone,  he  expressed  unquali- 
fied approbation  of  his  disciples,  and  gave  them  the  most  ample 
promises.  Judas  was  therefore  the  only  one  to  whom  the  commis- 
sion, which  he  gave  to  his  disciples  at  his  departure,  was  not  to  be 
applied. 

III.  3.     The  apostolic  commission. 

See  John  17:  18,  20.  20:  21.  Matt.  28:  16—20.  Luke  24:  47. 
Acts  1:  8.  10:  42.  Mark  16:  14,  15.  The  genuineness  of  the  lat- 
ter passage  is  vindicated  in  Diss.  I.  in  libror.  N.  Test,  historicorum 
ahquot  locos.  On  the  genuineness  of  the  conclusion  of  the  Gospel 
of  Mark,  the  reader  may  also  see  Paulus'  Commentary,  Eichhorn's 
Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  Hug's  Introduction,  and  Kui- 
nol  Commentarii  in  Marcum  et  Lucam.  The  latter  work  contains 
additional  references,  as  well  as  a  compendious  view  of  the  evidence 
for  and  against  the  genuineness  of  this  passage.  See  also  Thiess' 
New  critical  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament.  To  the  writers 
mentioned  by  the  two  last  authors,  may  be  added  Gratz's  '^  Attempt 
to  account  for  the  origin  of  the  first  three  Gospels,"  Tubingen  1812, 
in  which  the  genuineness  of  this  passage  is  disputed. 

III.  4.     Jesus  expected  that  his  Father  would  support  and  aid  the 

apostles. 

See  John  15:  16.     17:  15,  20. 

III.  5.     The  apostles  were  the  companions  of  Jesus. 
See  Mark  3:  14,  inoitjae  dcodena,  I'va  wai>  fxei'  ccvtov,  he  appoint- 
ed twelve,  that  they  should  remain  with  him.     John  15:  27.  Com- 
pare Acts  1:  21  etc. 

III.  6.   The  apostles  were  witnesses  of  his  ivories  and  doctrines. 

See  John  15:  27.  17:  6—Q,  14.  Luke  24:  45—48.  Acts  1:  2, 
3,  21,  22.  10:  39,  41. 

III.  7.    Supernatural  aid  was  combined  with  the  use  of  their  own 
faculties  in  the  case  of  the  apostles. 

Matt.  13:  52.  10:  27.  There  certainly  were  instances  in  which 
the  apostles  were  to  speak  without  any  preparation,  Luke  21:  14, 
and  in  which  their  superior  helper,  who  promised  to  supply  the 
want  of  preparation,  must  necessarily  do  more  than  merely  inspire 
them   with    intrepidity   and   presence   of  mind  ;     since  otherwise 


128  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

they  could  not  dispense  with  previous  reflection,  so  necessary  to  give 
value  and  effect  to  their  communications.  There  were  instances  in 
which  by  the  special  aid  of  Christ^  or^  of  the  Holy  Spirit,^  the 
apostles  were,  in  the  very  moment  of  their  delivery,  Iv  avtri  rrj 
cDQcc^  supplied  with  the  words  or  the  truths  which  they  were  to  utter'* 
and  previous  meditation  was  thus  rendered  unnecessary.^  But  the 
promise  contained  in  the  texts  referred  to,  specifies  the  occasions 
when  this  aid  should  be  given  ;  namely,  when  they  were  arraigned 
before  a  public  tribunal,  and  had  to  speak  in  self-defence,  and  conse- 
quently stood  in  greater  need  of  special  assistance  than  in  the  dis- 
charge of  the  ordinary  duties  of  their  office.  Still,  one  thing  at  least, 
follows  from  this  promise,  namely,  that  in  every  case  in  which  their 
circumstances  rendered  it  necessary,  the  Spirit  of  God  did  suggest  to 
the  apostles,  what  they  should  utter.  Other  cases  might  occur, 
beside  those  of  their  judicial  defence,  in  which  the  apostles  would 
need  such  special  aid  in  the  discharge  of  their  official  duties ;  and 
we  learn  from  some  passages  of  Scripture,^  that  they  were  author- 
ized to  expect  such  special  aid  on  such  occasions,  as  well  as  when 
arraigned  before  the  tribunal  of  their  enemies.  But  if  special  aid 
was  given  whenever  it  was  necessary,  it  follows  that  when  it  was 
not  given,  it  would  have  been  superfluous ;  and,  therefore,  that 
when  the  apostles  were  left  to  the  use  of  their  own  powers,  their  in- 
structions were  no  less  conformable  to  the  will  of  their  divine  In- 
structor, than  when  they  were  directed  by  his  special  aid. 

Note.  From  Acts  23:  5,  a  suspicion  may  arise,  that  the  apostle 
Paul,  in  his  defence  before  the  Jewish  sanhedrim,  took  refuge  under 
a  falsehood.  But  MIchaelis,  in  his  Annotations  in  loc.  p.  419 — 422, 
and  in  his  Introduction  to  N.  T.  p.  53  etc.  has  proved  from  Jose- 
phus,  that  Ananias  was  not  at  that  time,  properly  the  high-priest ;  but 
had  previously  been  removed,  and  at  this  time,  when  there  was  no 
high-priest,  he  was  arbitrarily  acting  in  that  capacity.  Now,  either 
this  was  not  known  to  Paul,  who  had  arrived  at  Jerusalem  only  a 
few  days  previously,  or  Paul  intends,  by  the  words  ovx  ijdaiv  oxl 
ffTzlv  oLQXi'iQivi  I  did  not  know  that  he  was  a  high-priest,  to  insinuate 
that  Ananias  actually  was  not  high-priest.' 

III.  8.  See  John  14:  17,  itvsv/^a  Tfjg  akr,&eiag  the  Spirit  of 
truth.   16:  13—15.  1  Cor.  2:  10,  11. 

1  Luke  21: 15.  2  John  IG:  13—15.  3  Luke  12:  12. 

4v.  12.     Matt.  10:19.     Mark  13:  11.  5  y.  11. 

6  John  14:  26.     16:12—15. 

7  Compare  also  Hess'  "  History  and  Writings  of  the  Apostles  of  Jesus,  Vol. 
II.  p.  411  etc.  3d  edit.  1809—1811. 


§  9.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  129 

III.  9.  ^TnofAvriaevviiaqnavTaa  ehtov  vfilv  he  will  remind  you 
of  all  things  which  I  have  told  you,  John  14:  26. 

III.  10.  Nature  of  the  aid  afforded  by  the  Spirit  to  the  apostles. 

In  the  dissertation,  On  the  nature  of  Inspiration,  it  is  clearly 
proved,  that  the  interpretation  of  the  words,  John  14:  16,  26.  15: 
26.  16:  7,  13 — 16,  which  makes  those  promises  of  the  constant  aid 
and  influence  of  the  Spirit  to  signify  nothing  more  than  an  ordinary 
agency  o( Divine  Providence  favouring  the  natural  and  gradual  ex- 
pansion of  the  views  of  the  apostles  ;  does  not  at  all  harmonize  with 
those  promises.^  "  Nothing  but  the  promise  of  extraordinary  divine 
aid,  and  of  communications  from  a  superior  power,  could  have  af- 
forded satisfaction  and  tranquillity  to  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  And 
the  nature  of  the  Saviour's  words  evinces,  that  he  intended  to  awak- 
en in  his  disciples  and  apostles,  the  expectation  of  extraordinary  aid." 

111.  11.  Ta  ig^ofieva  avayyiXii  vf.i7v  he  will  show  you  things  to 
come,  John  16:  13. 

III.  12.  Aidritu  TIANTA  he  shall  show  you  all  things,  John 
14:  26.  '06riy7]OsvviAa?  dg  JJAHAN  zriif  ayri&itav  he  will  con- 
duct you  into  all  truth,  16:  13. 

III.  13.     The  nature  and  personality  of  the  nagdnXtjTog,  or  Com- 
forter. 

It  is  evident  from  the  predicates  dM'^ei  and  vnof^vrjGft,  which  are 
applied  to  the  nagaxlrjiog  John  14:  26,  that  by  the  Comforter  must 
be  intended  such  an  assistant  as  instructs  and  reminds.  The  ac- 
cordance of  this  signification  of  the  word,  with  the  usage  of  the  lan- 
guage is  proved  in  Lbsner's  Observv.  ex  Philone,  on  John  14:  16, 
in  Volborth's  Programm  on  nagditlT^Tog,  Gbttingen,  1786,  p.  13 
etc.  and  Ernesti  Opusc.  philol.  crit.  p.  215.  the  edit,  of  Lardner. 
The  evidence  adduced  in  these  works,  to  prove  that  TiagaxXtjiog 
signifies  a  teacher  or  adviser,  is  derived  partly  from  the  signification 
of  the  words  nagayMlelv  (Tit.  1: 9. 2:  15)  and  nagdnltjatg  (1 
Thess.  2:  3 ;)  partly  from  some  passages  of  Philo,  especially  in  his 
treatise  ."  De  mundi  Opificio,"  T.  I.  p.  5.  ed.  Mangey,  where  it  is 
said  :  ovdsvl  nagaxli^Tco^  fAOvo)  di  auiw  ^g7]G(xfievog  6  ^eog  lyvco — i.  e. 
employing  no  counsellor,  but  following  his  own  pleasure,  God  de- 
termined ;  and  partly  from  the  Hebrew  word  y^b'n  (interpreter), 
which  is  twice  rendered  by  t2"'^p")D  {na^dxlTog)  in  the  Chaldee 


r 


1  Flatt's  Mag.  Vol.  II.  No.  1.  p.  19-23. 
17 


130  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TEST.  [bK.  I. 

Version.!  But  we  have  no  objection  to  the  more  general  sense  of 
the  word  nagdxXrjTog  assistant,  helper,  which  is  given  by  Knapp. — 
For  the  nature  of  the  case  proves,  that  he  who  was  to  aid  the  apos- 
tles in  the  discharge  of  their  duties,^  must  necessarily  have  been  an 
instructor  in  the  truth,  nvivfAcc  trjg  aX?i&6iag,  John  14:  17.  15:26. 
16:  13.  The  commission  of  the  apostles  was,  to  teach  and  to  pro- 
mulgate the  doctrines  of  Christ  (Matt.  28:  20)  agreeably  to  his  in- 
tention (John  17:  18,  20)  and  meaning  (16:  13 — 15  ;)  it  was,  there- 
fore, only  by  instructing  them,  and  bringing  to  their  recollection 
things  forgotten,  that  this  Assistant  could  enable  the  apostles  to 
publish  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  agreeably  to  his  intention,  and  to  give 
their  instructions  an  infallibility  equal  to  the  instructions  of  Christ 
himself,  John  13:  20.  Matt.  16:  19.  Now  this  infallibility  of  the 
apostolical  instructions  could  not  be  attained,  unless  their  divine 
Assistant  should  recall  to  their  recollection  the  declarations  of  Christ, 
and  instruct  them^  in  those  cases  in  which  they  either  had  not  fully 
comprehended,  or  had  partially  forgotten  those  declarations ;  or,  in 
which  Christ  had  purposely  omitted  giving  them  full  instruction  on 
some  topics  which  they  were  nevertheless  to  explain  and  teach 
after  his  death  (John  16:  11).  We  cannot  safely  attribute  the 
doctrines  of  the  apostles  to  the  Holy  Spirit^  and  to  Christ  (John  16: 
13 — 15),  unless  we  suppose  that  their  divine  Assistant,  who  au- 
thenticated their  doctrines  by  miracles,^  at  the  same  time,  by  his 
supernatural  influence,  made  those  doctrines  worthy  of  that  faith 
which  the  Spirit  of  truth  endeavoured  to  procure  for  them  by  his 
miracles.^  The  great  miracle  of  a  divine  and  therefore  infallible 
system  of  doctrines,  originating  from  Jesus  himself,  would  with 
most  Christians,  have  failed  of  its  intended  effect,  if  God  had  not 
proved  by  a  supernatural  influence  on  the  minds  of  the  apostles, 
that  the  doctrines  taught  by  them  actually  were  the  unadulterated 
doctrines  of  Christ. 

Eichhorn's  "  Bibliothek"  contains  the  assertion,  that  nagctxXrjtog 
signifies  the  doctrine  itself  which  Christ  taught,  and  the  more  en- 
larged view  of  it  which  the  apostles  obtained  after  the  resurrection 
and  ascension  of  Christ.  But  this  is  contradicted  by  the  fact,  that 
the  nagdalriTog,  Comforter,  stands  in  a  relation,  both  to  Christ  who 
taught  the  doctrine  of  the  Paraclete  (John  15:  13 — 15)  and  to  his 

1  On  the  different  explanations  of  the  word  TcaQaxXrjTog,  the  reader  may  con- 
sult the  Prograram  of  Knapp,  and  Kuinol's  Comment,  on  John  ]4:  15. 

2  John  15:  2C.     16:  8  etc.     Acts  1:  8.     Luke  24:  48  etc. 

3  John  15:  26.     16:  13—15.     Conip.  1  Cor.  2:  8—1.3.     §  10. 

4  John  16: 8.     Matt.  10:  20.  Compare  III.  14.  John  15:  26.  Comp.  Acts  15:  28. 

5  John.  14:  12.  Rom.  15: 19f  1  Cor.  12:  11.  §  10. 

6  1  John  5:  6.  "  The  supernatural  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  prove  that  the  doctrines 
published  by  the  Spirit  are  true."— On  the  Object  of  John,  p.  227. 


I 


§  9.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  131 

postles  who  obtained  this  more  enlarged  view  of  the  doctrines  of 
Christ  after  his  death,  in  which  the  doctrine  of  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles could  not  stand  towards  them  ;  see  Matt.  10:  20.  John  15:  26, 
27.     And,  ahhough,  upon  that  supposition,  the  phrase  uXXog  naga- 

Xfitog,  another  Comforter  (John  14:  16),  might  indicate  a  counter- 
part to  Jesus  as  a  personal  instructor,  or  to  his  oral  instructions,  in- 
asmuch as  it  would  import,  that  the  doctrines  which  Jesus  taught, 
were  more  fully  developed  and  confirmed  by  his  resurrection  and 
ascension  ;  the  inconsistency  must  be  palpable,  when  we  read  fur- 
ther, and  see  Jesus  proving  to  his  disciples,  at  full  length,  as  he 
does  in  John  16:  13 — 15,  that  his  doctrines,  when  properly  illus- 
itrated  by  his  resurrection  and  ascension,  would  not  differ  at  all  from 
*he  doctrines  he  had  already  taught  them  ;  and  that  these  doctrines 
were  altogether  his  own,  o  nagayiXrixog  oi)  XaXriasi  aqj  iavzov,  dkX' 
ooot  cii/  ccyiovGi]  kaXt]Git>  the  Comforter  will  not  speak  of  himself,  but 
will  relate  the  things  which  he  shall  have  heard ;  and  that  these 
idoctrines  will  promote  his  glory,  because  they  are  his  doctrines, 
ixelvog  do'^dofc  ifAS,  oit  in  tov  i^iov  Xrixpirav  he  will  glorify  me,  be- 
cause he  will  take  of  mine.  On  the  contrary,  the  phrase  aXXog 
maQaxXfjzoQj  has  a  natural  meaning,  if  we  suppose  it  to  signify 
a  new,  invisible  teacher,  who  was  to  supply  the  place  of  Je- 
sus, who  had  instructed  them  by  personal  intercourse ;  for  in  this 
case,  it  was  necessary  for  Jesus  to  inform  his  disciples,  that  their 
new  assistant  was  in  the  closest  union  with  hims6lf,  and  therefore 
would  communicate  only  such  instructions  as  would  accord  with  the 
doctrines  which  he,  their  former  teacher,  had  delivered  to  them. 
^Moreover,  in  Matt.  10:  20,  there  is  a  clear  distinction  made  between 
the  apostles,  who  spake  and  vindicated  the  cause  of  Christ  (v.  19. 
Luke  12:  11.  21:  14),  and  the  Spirit  of  their  Father,  who  spake 
through  them  :  ov  ydg  v (.i  e7g  iai6  ol  XaXoupng,  (xX?m  to  nvev^a  tov 
majQog  vf^ojv  z6  XaXovv  if  v^ilv  for  it  is  not  you  that  speak,  but  the 
'Spirit  of  your  Father  that  speaketh  by  you.  This  distinction  could, 
not  have  been  made,  if  the  apostles  themselves  were  the  only  per- 
sons that  spoke,  and  if  the  -nvev^xa  XaXovv  iv  avrolg,  was  merely  the 
enlarged  view  which  they  had  of  tlie  doctrine  of  Christ.  Further, 
we  cannot  see  how  Christ  could  have  rendered  all  preparation  un- 
mecessary  to  the  apostles,  when  called  on  to  defend  themselves,  un- 
less it  was  by  the  promise  of  supernatural  instruction,  to  be  given 
them  at  the  very  time  when  they  were  to  speak  in  self-defence 
(Matt.  10:  19.  Mark  13:  11.  Luke  21:  14).  For,  however  per- 
fect might  have  been  their  knowledge  of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  af- 
ter his  resurrection,  still,  in  every  case  in  which  they  were  called  to 
vindicate  his  cause,  it  would  be  profitable  to  the  cause  of  truth,  to 
recall  the  doctrines  to  their  memories,  and  to  reflect  on  the  circura- 
Btances  in  which  they  were  to  defend  them.     Finally,  how  could 


132  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

Christ  (John  15:  12)  have  distinguished  between  the  testimony  of 
the  Paraclete,  whom  the  Father  should  send  to  them,  and  the  testi- 
mony which  the  apostles  themselves  should  bear,  having  learned  it 
by  their  personal  intercourse  with  him  ;  if  Tiaguxkt^Tog  signified  noth- 
ing else  than  that  enlarged  view  of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  which  the 
apostles  should  acquire  after  his  death  (John  1 5:  27)  ?  o  -nagaxXf}- 
Tog  ov  iyoj  m^ipta  naga  tov  7iuTp6g---i}t  e7v  o  g  luagivgrjoei  tkqI 
ifAOv'  ital  vfis7g  d's  hvlqtvqsits,  oti  an  agyjig  fin  ffiov  iard  the 
Comforter  whom  I  shall  send  from  my  Father,  he  will  bear  witness 
of  me ;  and  ye  also  shall  bear  witness,  because  ye  were  with  me 
from  the  beginning.  It  has  already  been  seen,  that  the  personal 
agency  of  the  apostles  was  not  excluded  by  the  peculiar  divine  aid 
which  they  received ;  as  is  feared  by  a  writer  in  Eichhorn's  Bibl. 
sup.  cit.  p.  300.  See  also  <§>  11  infra. 

III.  14.     T7te  divine  assistance  afforded  to  the  apostles,  extended 
to  all  their  instructions. 

The  words  (Matt.  10:  20)  ov  yao  v^slg  late  (not  I'oeai^e  comp. 
also  Mark  13:  11) — XaXovv  Iv  vfuw  for  it  is  not  ye  who  speak,  but 
the  Spirit  of  your  Father  which  speaketh  in  you,  cannot  well  refer 
merely  to  their  defence  before  a  public  tribunal ;  for  it  had  been 
stated  in  the  previous  verse,  that  every  thing  which  it  should  be 
necessary  for  them  to  say  at  that  particular  juncture,  should  be  sug- 
gested to  them  ;  but  they  seem  rather  to  refer  to  all  their  instruc- 
tions, and  to  contain  the  ground  of  the  promise  in  the  verse  imme- 
diately preceding.  The  idea  of  Jesus  seems  to  be  this:  "For,  the 
instructions  which  ye  my  apostles  in  genera]  give,  are  derived,  not 
so  much^  from  yourselves,  as  from  the  Holy  Spirit ;  hence,  when 
you  are  called  upon  to  defend  your  doctrines,  ye  need- feel  no  anx- 
iety, but  may  confidently  rely  on  the  Holy  Spirit  to  vindicate  his 
own  doctrines,  by  suggesting  to  you  the  very  words  of  your  de- 
fence." In  like  manner  Peter  speaks  (1  Pet.  1:  12)  of  the  preach- 
ers of  the  gospel  tmv  ivuyytXvoa^avwv,  as  those  who  spake  not  by 
themselves,  but  by  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  down  from  heav- 
en ;  that  is,  in  speaking,  they  received  such  aid  from  the  Holy  Spir- 
it, that  their  doctrines  could  with  propriety  be  ascribed  to  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  their  author  (John  16:  8). 

III.  15.     Divine  authority  of  the  Apostles. 
In  Matt.  16:  19,  Christ  gives  to  the  apostle  Peter,  and  in  Matt. 

1  Ov  expresses,  in  this  place,  a  comparative  negation,  as  it  does  in  Philipp.  2: 
21.  Col.  3  23.  See  Opus(^.  Acad.  Vol.  I.  p.  331.  Vol.  II.  p.  201.  Observv.  p. 
251  s. 


-§,  9.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  133 

18:  18,  to  the  other  apostles  also,  a  superintendance  over  the 
church,  yilslg  r^g  ^aodfiag  tmv  ovquvojv — sumrnam  potesatem  regni 
coelestis,  ss.  in  terra,  "  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  the  heavens" — 
the  supreme  power  in  his  church,  on  the  earth  (Is.  22:  22),  and  the 
power  to  enact  laws  which  should  be  of  divine  authority,  dt]Gai  xat 
Ivaui  to  bind  and  to  loose. ^  And  of  John  13:  20,  the  proper  mean- 
ing is  this :  "  whoever  puts  confidence  in  my  messengers,  believes 
in  me ;  and  whoever  puts  confidence  in  me,  believes  in  him  that 
sent  me."  Aaii§dvecv  here  signifies  the  same  as  niaifvecv  in  John 
5:  43,  comp.  v.  44,  46,  48 ;  i.  e.  to  put  confidence  in  a  person,  not 
to  reject  him,  to  receive  his  declarations  (John  12:  48),  to  listen  to 
him  (Matt.  10:  40.  Luke  10:  11),  dtxeoOat,,  fitj  dtxtOm—ai^oviiv, 
d&STilv?  To  these  passages  may  be  added  the  two  following  :  1 
John  4:  6,  "  We  (1  and  the  other  apostles)  are  not  of  the  world, 
but  of  God.  He  that  knows  God,  will  hear  us;"^  and  1  Pet.  1: 
23,  in  which  the  efficacy  and  unchangeable  identity  of  the  apostoli- 
cal doctrines  are  inferred  from  their  divine  origin  (comp.  v.  25  and 
12),  Xoyog  ^wvrog  -^eou — Qrifxu  avay/Elio^kv  ilg  vfxag  the  word  of 
the  living  God — the  word  wliich  is  preached  unto  you. 

The  passage  Gal.  2:  11  etc.  contains  no  objection  to  the  divine 
authority  of  the  apostles.  For  Paul  does  not  there  censure  the 
doctrines,  but  the  conduct  of  Peter  (v.  14)  ;  because  the  Jewish 
Christians  at  Jerusalem,  (whose  deportment  was  disapproved  of  by 
the  apostle  James  himself  Act  15:  24),  might  have  made  use  of 
this  conduct  of  Peter  to  the  prejudice  of  that  doctrine,  the  truth  of 
which  Peter  himself,  as  well  as  Paul,  acknowledged  (v.  15,  16), 
notwithstanding  his  conduct  in  this  instance  was  not  consistent  with 
it.  Peter  and  Paul  had  alike  acknowledged  the  principle,  that  no 
one  could  be  justified  on  the  ground  of  his  fulfilment  of  the  law,  but 
that  we  must  be  justified  by  putting  our  trust  in  Christ ;  and  from 
this  principle,  both  had  inferred,  that  those  who  believe  in  Christ, 
and  thus  obtain  assurance  of  salvation,  are  no  longer  obHged  to  ob- 
serve those  ceremonies  which  have  no  influence  in  producing  dtxal- 
wGtp  justification  and  salvation  (see  Acts  15:  8 — 11).  Peter's  with- 
drawing from  the  Gentile  Christians,  when  the  Jewish  converts  from 
Jerusalem  arrived  (Gal.  2:  12),  was  dissimulation,  and  not  the  result 
of  a  change  in  his  opinion  on  that  subject ;  for  Peter  did  not  at- 
tempt to  defend  himself  against  the  public  rebuke  of  Paul,  (v.  11, 
14  etc.)  But  the  advocates  for  the  law,  who  had  come  from  Jeru- 
salem to  Antioch,  might  have  regarded  the  conduct  of  Peter  as  be- 
ing a  refusal  on  his  part  to  acknowledge  the  circumcised  gentiles  as 

1  Vide  Dissert,  de  notione  regni.  coelestis,  p.  32  s.  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  I.  p. 
290  etc.     Compare  Kuinol  Comment,  in  Malt,  ad  h.  1.  " 

2^  Comparo  what  the  author  says  on  John  13:  20,  in  Flatt's  Mag.  Vol.  VIII.  p. 
67  etc.  3  On  the  Object  of  John,  p.  394. 


134  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bk.  !. 

christian  brethren.  Thus  they  might  have  derived  from  it  support 
to  their  doctrine,  by  which  they  endeavored  to  bind  the  gentile 
converts  to  circumcision  and  the  Levitical  law.  They  might  have 
inferred  from  it,  that  the  great  principle  that  we  are  justified  not  by 
obeying  the  law  of  Moses,  not  by  observing  the  ceremonies  pre- 
scribed by  it,  but  exclusively  by  trusting  in  Christ,  was  an  errone- 
ous and  pernicious  principle.^ 


SECTION  X. 

The  authority  of  the  apostle  Paul. 

The  apostle  Paul  claimed  equal  authority  with  the  other  apos- 
tles.(l)  For  he  asserts  that  he  was  chosen  by  Christ  himself,(2) 
to  be  his  messenger  ;(3)  that  the  power  of  God  made  him  compe- 
tent to  discharge  the  duties  of  his  office  ;(4)  that  the  doctrines  of 
Christianity,  which  neither  his  nor  any  other  human  intellect  could 
have  discovered  by  any  course  of  investigation, (5)  were  not  taught 
him  by  any  man,  not  by  an  older  apostle, (6)  but  w^ere  revealed(7) 
to  him  by  the  almighty  agency  of  God  himself  ;(8)  and  finally, 
that  the  inspiration (9)  of  the  divine  Spirit  extended  even  to  his 
words,  and  to  all  his  exhibitions  of  revealed  truths. (10)  We  learn 
from  the  apostle  Paul  himself,  that  this  Spirit,  who  revealed  to  him 
unknown  truths,  extended  the  same  aid  to  him  as  to  the  other  apos- 
tles, and  in  the  discharge  oi all  his  official  duties.(ll)  This  divine 
influence,(12)  therefore,  was  not  confined  to  his  teaching  those  truths 
which  are  properly  termed  revealed  doctrines  ;(13)  but  when  he 
was  inculcating  truths  which  he  had  learned  in  other  ways,(14)  and 
when  giving  commands(15)  or  advice  founded  on  these  truths,(16) 
his  communications  were  accordant  with  the  will  of  Christ,  with 
which  the  Spirit  made  him  acquainted  ;(17)  and  thus  his  instructions 
could  with  propriety  all  be  ascribed  to  the  Lord,  or  to  the  Spirit  of 
the  Lord. (18)     They  derived   their  authority(19)  and  credibility 

1  See  the  Dissert,  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  in  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  p.  458 — 4Gl,and  Michaelis'  Notes  on  Gal.  2:  12  etc.  The  rejected 
construction  of  this  contest  between  Peter  and  Paul,  and  of  its  importance  and 
consequences,  which  is  adopted  in  some  late  works,  e.  g.  in  the  Catholic  Epis- 
tles of  Augusti,  Pt.  I.  p.  167  etc.  and  in  Schmidt's  Historico-critical  Introduction 
to  the  New  Test.  Pt.  I.  p.  193  etc.  is  unsupported  by  historical  evidence.  Comp. 
Tub.  gel.  Anz.  I.  1802,  s.  815  f.  Jahr,  1807,  s.  204,  and  Hess'  "  History  and  Writ- 
ings of  the  apostles  of  Jesus,"  Pt.  H.  p.  312  etc. 


^  10.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLe  PAUL.  135 

(20)  from  him,  who  was  the  perpetual  Instructor  of  the  apostle,  and 
who  would  have  prevented  him  from  making  any  communications 
which  were  either  wholly  or  in  part  inconsistent  with  the  will  of 
Christ.  Hence  the  apostle  says,  in  general,  that  Christ  taught  by 
him  ;(21)  and  that  his  doctrines  were  to  be  regarded  and  obeyed 
as  the  doctrines  of  God  and  not  of  man. (22)  The  reality  of  Paul's 
having  experienced  divine  teaching  and  illumination,  appears  from 
the  evident  credibility (23)  of  the  history  of  his  call  to  the  apostolical 
office,  an  office  for  which  he  could  be  qualified  only  by  a  special 
divine  influence('§>  9) ;  and  likewise  from  his  miracleSj(24)  the  his- 
torical truth  of  which  was  so  incontrovertible  that  even  when  ad- 
dressing his  enemies, (25)  he  could  appeal  to  them  in  confirmation 
of  his  doclrines(26)  and  of  his  apostolical  authority. (27)  The  oth- 
er apostles  also  had  no  hesitation  in  acknowledging  him  as  a  fellow 
apostle.(28) 

III.  1 .     The  apostolical  dignity  of  Paul 

Is  asserted  by  himself,  in  1  Cor.  9:  1,  5.  2  Cor.  11:  5.  12:  11. 
ov8^v  vGTigtjaoi  tmv  vnig  Uuv  dnoGi6),(av  I  am  not  inferior  to  the 
most  distinguished  aposdes. 

III.  2.     That  he  was  divinely  appointed  to  his  office 

Is  declared  in  Gal.  1:  1,  dnoGToXog,  ovx  an  dv{tQojnwv,  ovdi  ^^* 
dv&QMnov,  dXkd  did  zov  'Jfjaov  Xgiazou  an  apostle,  not  of  man, 
nor  by  man,  but  by  Jesus  Christ.  Rom.  1:  1,  5.  1  Cor.  1:  17.  1 
Tim.  1: 11,  12.  Acts  26:  15—18.  22:  10—15. 

III.  3.  2  Cor.  5:  20,  vneg  Xgiavov  ngea^euofiev  we  are  sent 
as  ambassadors  of'Christ ;  comp.  John  17:  18. 

III.  4.  2  Cor.  3:  5,  6,  o  -diog  Ixavwafv  i^fidg  dcaxovovg  xaivtjg 
diad^fjxfjg  God  hath  qualified  us  to  be  ministers  of  the  new  covenant. 

III.  5.  1  Cor.  2:  7,  Xalovfiev&eov  aaqjiav  iv fivarijgia)  I  speak 
the  wisdom  of  God,  which  was  heretofore  a  mystery.  9:  11.  Eph. 
3:  9,  10,  fivaifjgiov  ccnoxfugvfifAtvov  dno  twi/  aiojvwv  Iv  rro  d^fto  the 
mystery  which  was  known  only  to  God,  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world. 

III.  6.     Paul  did  not  receive  his  instructions  from  any  older  apostle, 

w''\  Gal.  1:  11,  12,  17.     As  Paul  was  not  to  learn  from  the  other 
apostles,  but,  (like  the  others,  Acts  1:  21.  «^  9),  was  to*  testify  to 


136  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OP  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I 

the  things  which  he  had  seen  and  heard  (Acts  22:  14,  15.  26:  16 
1  Cor.  9:  1),  therefore  Christ,  now  in  heaven,  revealed  to  hin 
many  things,  which  he  had  communicated  to  his  other  apostle; 
during  his  residence  on  earth.  To  such  revelations  our  Lord  doubt 
less  refers,  when  he  uses  the  future  oip^riao^ui  I  will  appear  unu 
thee  (Acts  26:  16).  An  example  of  such  immediate  instruction  i 
found  in  1  Cor.  11:  23,  where  Paul  says  he  was  thus  instructei 
relative  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  iyw  nagtXu^ov  dno  xov  xvqIov  I  re 
ceived  from  the  Lord.  From  Acts  26:  16,  where  Christ  tells  Pau 
that  he  shall  be  a  witness  both  of  the  things  which  he  had  seen,  am 
which  he  would  hereafter  communicate  to  him,  wv  tf  ildeg,  (Lp  t 
6q)^T)aofiai  aoc  it  is  evident  that  the  preterites  in  the  passage  Act 
22:  15,  i'(J7?  fiagrvg—aiv  icogaaag  ital  i^novaag,  do  not  refer  to  th 
past  only,  but  also  to  future  time.     Comp.  John  4:  38,  umaTHXa, 

III.  7.     Immediate  suggestion  of  God,  the  source  of  PdnVs 

knowledge. 
Gal.  1:  12,  16,  to  ivayyiXiov — nagiXa^ov—d&  ccTioxuXvxpfoi 
'Jrjaov  Xgiaiou  the  Gospel — I  received — by  a  revelation  from  Jesu 
Christ.  1  Cor.  2: 10, 12,  rfiJv  amxaXvipiv  6  S^eog  did  tov  nvevftccto 
avTOv  God  revealed  it  to  us  by  his  Spirit.  Eph.  3:  2  etc.  xar 
dnoydXvxifiv  iyvoj gtai  /.loi  {sc.  6  <^e6g)  to  fivoTi^giov,  by  revelation  h 
(God)  made  known  to  me  the  mystery ;  comp.  v.  5. 

III.  8.  2  Cor.  4:  6,  o  -d^eog  6  elncjv  Iv.  axozovg  qxog  idfiipcti  (sc 
lailv^)  og  iXafiipfv  iv  xulg  xagdlaig  i^fiojv  the  God  who  commande 
light  to  shine  out  of  darkness  (it  is,  that)  hath  shined  into  our  hearts 
The  words  6  -i^eog — Xdfixpat,  refer  to  the  omnipotence  of  God ;  sei 
Gen.  1:  2,  and  the  work  On  the  Object  of  John,  p.  494. 

III.  9.  2  Cor.  5:19,  d^t^ivog  iv  rifuv  ror  Xoyov  vtjg  xazaXXayr, 
and  gave  to  us  by  inspiration,  the  doctrine  of  reconciliation  with  Go 
through  Christ.  Oifxevog  stands  connected  with  n^  some  distance  pr( 
ceding,  and  must  be  construed  with  the  words  Oeog  -^v  nazaXXdaao)^ 
and  not  with  the  succeeding  firj—avTaiv.^ 

1  In  Dissert.  I,  in  Libror.  N.  T.  historicum  aliquot  locos,  not.  50.  Opusc.  aca( 
Vol.  III.  p.  30,  it  is  remarked,  that  the  aorists  often  indicate  the  present  and  fi 
lure  as  well  as  the  past  time.  Vigerus  de  Graecae  dictionis  idiotismis,  p.  204  et 

2  The  propriety  of  supplying  tarl  in  this  place,  is  shown  in  the  Disser 
Notitiae  historicae  epp.  ad  Corinthios  interpretationi  inservientes,  Note  190. 

3  See  the  Dissert.  "  On  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  409  etc.  Kypke,  c 
Acts  19:  21,  remarks  that  the  expression  ■^i'ai^tet  fV  xa^dqd  {(pQ-tjol)  rtvog  ia  mo 
frequently  used  of  foreign  communicauons,  or  suggestions  from  without.  Th£ 
the  proposition  xal  -d-f/nsvog—xaraXXayTJs  must  refer  to  the  apostles  alone,  is  st; 
ted  in  Gabler's  Programma,  Novae  curae  in  locum  Paulimim  2  Cor.  5:  14 — 2 
Pt.  III.  p.  13.  He  explains  the  word  d'ifuvo?  iv7]/uv  :  imposuit,  h.  e.  demandav 
nobis. 


'§>  10.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLE  PAUL.  137 

III.  10.  1  Cor.  2:  13.  In  the  Dissert.  Notitiae  historicae  in 
epp.  ad  Corinth,  note,  45,^  it  is  proved,  from  1  Cor,  1: 17 — 2:  16,  that 
Paul  clearly  distinguishes  between  the  doctrine  itself  and  the  manner 
in  which  it  is  communicated  :  and  that  he  derives  evidence  of  the 
divinity  of  his  doctrine,  from  the  fact  that  although  his  manner  of 
teaching  was  void  of  all  the  ornaments  of  artificial  oratory,  outtiv 
TiiiOoTg  Gocflag  loyoig^  yet  it  was  so  efficacious  that  its  influence 
must  have  proceeded  form  the  nviufxa  ayiov  the  Holy  Spirit. 

III.  11.  1  Cor.  2:  12,  iXd^o^ev  to  nviv^a  to  in  tov  &fou  we 
have  received  the  Spirit  which  is  of  God.  1  Cor.  7:  40,  doxcH  df 
^(xy(o  nvivfxa  {teov  tiiiv  I  think  I  also  have  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  comp, 
1  Cor.  9:  1—3.  2  Cor.  12:  11. 

III.  12.  1  Cor.  5:  20,  <wff  row  ^iov  nu.Qav.a\ovviog  dl  i^ficov  as  if 
God  besought  you  by  us  ;  2  Cor.  2:  17,  ixdtov  Xakovfiev  we  speak 
as  from  God  ;  ix  fronij  indicates  the  author  of  a  thing,  as  in  John  JO: 
32,  comp.  14:  10,  nokld  itaXd  I'gya  ix  tov  naxgog — 6  naTtjQnoieltd 
igya  many  good  works  of  the  Father — the  Father  doeth  the  works. 
Comp.  also  John  5:  19  etc.  The  same  signification  ix  has  in  1  Cor. 
1:  30,/|  avTov  {&fov)  "  Deo  efficiente."  See  the  Dissert,  on  the 
epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  note  189.  22).  In  1  Thess.  4:  15, 
Paul  says  tovto  Xiyofisv  vfuv  iv  koyot  kvqIov  this  we  say  unto  you 
as  by  the  command  of  the  Lord. 

III.  13.  Here  belongs  what  Paul  teaches  of  Christ  as  the  cause 
of  our  salvation,  2  Cor.  2:  17,  cJ?  ix  &eov  iv  Xqiotm  kaXovfiev :  "  Deo 
nos  moderante,  de  Christo  praecipimus,"  i.  e.  God  directing  us,  we 
teach  concerning  Christ.  The  doctrines  concerning  Christ,  in  2  Cor. 
4:  6.  1  Cor.  2:  7  etc.  (comp.  v.  1  fxagtvgiov  &{ov)^  are  represen- 
ted as  revealed  truths.^  To  the  head  of  revealed  doctrines,  taken 
in  the  more  limited  sense,  as  signifying  doctrines  which  men  could 
not  discover  by  their  own  faculties,  belong  also  the  hidden  things  of 
futurity,  (John  16:  13),  a  knowledge  of  which  was  communicated 
^  to  the  apostle  Paul.  1  Thess.  4:  15  etc.  Comp.  1  Cor.  15:  51. 

III.  14.  Thus  he  relates  his  own  history,  2  Cor.  11:22 — 12: 
18,  which  he  himself  would  of  course  recollect. 

III.  15.  Thus  1  Thess.  4:  3 — 7,  contains  injunctions,  the  pro- 
priety of  which  even  reason  and  conscience  teach. 

1  Opuscul.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  267—270. 

2  Compare  Meyer's  "  Developement  of  Paul's  doctrinal  system,  p.  344  etc. 
Altona,  1801. 

18 


138  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

III.  16.  1  Cor.  7:  12,  25,  40.  2  Cor.  8:  8, 10,  he  distinguish- 
es between  his  own  counsels  and  the  commands  of  God. — iyoi)  Xiyoi, 
ov  6  Kv^iog — innctytjv  avglov  ovk  ^X^^  yvojfir]v  di didw^i —  ^atd  xriv 
ifitjv  yvwfxriv — ov  xuv  Intiayrjv  kf'yo) — yvwfiriv  iv  tov  m  didwfii,  Isay, 
and  not  the  Lord — I  have  no  command  of  the  Lord,  but  I  give  my 
judgment — according  to  ray  judgment — I  speak  not  by  command — • 
I  give  my  judgment  in  this  matter.  See  Kypke  On  tlie  significa- 
tion of  yifM^fjv  didcof^c  in  1  Cor.  7:  25. 

III.  17.  1  Cor.  2:  16,  i^u67g  vovv  X^taiov  ex^fiip  we  have 
been  made  acquainted  with  the  mind  of  Christ,  comp.  v.  12,  f'A«/?o- 
f^ev  TO  Tivevfia  to  ix^'&eov  we  have  recieved  the  Spirit  which  is  of 
God.  See  also  John  16:  13 — 15  ix  lov  I^aov  IrjxpeTai,  ss.  nvev^a 
he,  (i.  e.  the  Spirit)  shall  take  of  mine. 

III.  18.     Paul's  doctrines  are  justly  considered  as  the  doctrines  of 

God. 

2  Cor.  12: 19,  iv  Xqiotm  kaXovfxsv — "juvante  ac  moderante  Dom- 
ino." This  is  the  interpretation  given  in  note  152  of  the  dissert,  quo- 
ted in  Illust.  12,  agreeably  to  the  signification  of  fV  in  1  Cor.  12:  3, 
and  in  Matt.  22:  43.  In  the  same  dissertation,  the  passage  2  Cor. 
11: 16, 17,  containing  these  words  o  kaXoJ,  ouxuta  tov  hvqvov^  dXl'  cog 
iv  ccq)goGuv7]^  is  thus  explained  :  "  If  ye  cannot  agree  to  acquit  me 
of  the  folly  of  boasting,  then  let  me  only  speak  thus  foolishly.  What 
I  say  in  favour  of  myself,  let  me  be  understood  to  speak  out  of  my 
own  folly,  and  not  under  the  influence  of  Christ."  Ov  IccXm  would 
then  be  used  agreeably  to  a  customary  idiom,  for  ov  doxeo  Xake7v} 
According  to  this  interpretation,  the  dapgoavvri  folly,  which  Paul  as- 
cribes to  himself,  was  not  dcpgoavvt}  folly,  in  Paul's  own  esteem,  but 
only  in  the  opinion  of  his  opponents.  What  renders  this  explana- 
tion the  more  probable  is,  that  in  v.  16  he  says  :  "Again,  I  write 
unto  you,  let  no  one  suppose  me  to  be  a  fool  ;"  and  in  12:  19,  as- 
sures us  that  he  speaks  Kazeviantov  tov  ■O^ou  iv  Xqigim  in  the  pres- 
ence of  God,  in  Christ.  But  if  notwithstanding  these  proofs,  we 
should  still  believe  that  Paul  here  attributes  to  himself  a  deviation 
from  propriety  dqgoavvriv,  and  thus  shows  that,  at  this  time,  he  was 
not  under  the  influence  of  the  Lord  ;  still  the  passage  would  even 
then  prove,  that  ordinarily  he  did  speak  under  the  influence  of  the 
Lord  ;  since  he  deemed  it  necessary  to  state  this  extraordinary  case 
as  being  an  exception,  and  distinctly  to  confine  the  exception  to 
what  he  said  in  self  commendation.  Here  belong  also  the  passages, 
1  Thess.  4:  2,  ^^«  tov  xvglov  'Irjaov  through  the  Lord  Jesus  ;  and 

1  See  "  Observv.  ad  analogiam  et  syntaxin  Hebraicani  pertinentes,"  p.  14.  no  2L 


§   10.1  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLE  PAUL.  139 

1  Cor.  7:  40  doxoi  di  xayco  nvevfia  'Osov  h'xetv  I  think   I  also  have 
the  spirit  of  God. 

III.  19.  1  Thess,  4:  8.  2  Cor.  2:  9.  10:  6.  In  the  two  latter 
passages,  Paul  demands  obedience  {vna^Aoriv)  to  his  decisions,  as  to 
injunctions  more  than  human. 

III.  20.  1  Cor.  5:  25,  "  Even  if  I  am  not  giving  laws  by  divine 
command,  still  I  am  communicating  my  advice  the  counsel  of  one 
whom  the  grace  of  God  has  made  worthy  of  confidence  ;— in  other 
words,  the  advice  of  one,  whom,  notwithstanding  his  unworthiness, 
the  Lord  graciously  held  in  sufficient  estimation  (1  Tim.  1:  13),  to 
confide  to  him  the  apostolical  office  (1  Tim.  1:  12.  Acts  9:  15), 
and  who  therefore,  on  account  of  the  confidence  reposed  in  him  by 
the  Lord,  and  the  influences^of  the  grace  given  him  (1  Tim.  1:^  12, 
tM  ivdwa^maavxi  {as  Xqkst^),  is  really  worthy  of  confidence,  i.  e. 
is* to  be  accredited  as  a  true  teacher,  a  teacher  tv  niaiei  nal  aX7]<^d(i 
in  faith  and  truth,  one  who  gives  no  advice  which  is  not  approved 
of  by  his  Lord." 

III.  21.  2  Cor.  13:  3,  tov  tv  ifiol  Xalovvzog  Xqiutov  Christ 
speaking  in  me.  In  Heb.  1:  1.  12:  25  (compare  with  2:  3),  Paul 
represents  his  doctrine  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Son  of  God ;  and 
states,  that  in  consequence  of  the  exalted  dignity  of  the  author  of 
these  doctrines,  those  who  rejected  them  exposed  themselves  to  the 
most  severe  punishments. 

^'III.  22.  1  Thess.  2:  13,  Uyov  axotig  naQ  ri{mv--idi'^aa&€  ov 
loyoi/avd^QMTKov,  aUa  itadojg  iartv  ttA??^w?,  Xoyov  d^eov  the  word  of 
instruction  (of  hearing,  auditas)  from  us,  ye  received  it,  not  as  the 
word  of  men,  but,  as  it  truly  is,  as  the  word  of  God.  2  Thess.  2: 
15.     2  Tim.  3:14. 

III.  23.     The  historical  credibility  of  the  account  of  Paul's  mi- 
raculous call  to  the  apostleship. 

Paul's  call  to  the  apostleship  by  the  immediate  appearance  of 
Christ  to  him,i  was  connected  with  such  changes  in  the  public 
transactions  of  the  day,  that  the  attention  of  the  sanhedrim  at  Je- 
rusalem and  of  many  others  must  necessarily  have  been  arrested  by 
it.  For  Paul  was  well  known  at  Jerusalem,  was  a  Pharisee,  and 
an  important  and  peculiarly  active  agent  of  the  sanhedrim  in  perse- 
cuting the  Christians.^     The  very  journey  to  Damascus,  on  which 

1  1  Cor.  15:  8,  9.     Acts  22:  10, 14  etc.  26:  15—20. 

2  Acts  22:  3-5, 19,  20.    26:  4,  5, 10,  11.    9:  13. 


140  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK,  I, 

Ilis  conversion  to  Christianity  and  call  to  the  apostolic  office  occur- 
red, was  undertaken  by  the  authority  of  the  high  priest  and  the 
sanhedrim,  and  for  the  purpose  of  searching  for  Christians  and 
bringing  them  captive  to  Jerusalem.^  The  sanhedrim,  therefore, 
could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  his  conversion.^  And  this  sudden 
change  actually  excited  universal  surprise  at  Damascus  and  in  the 
congregation  of  Judea."^  Now,  is  it  reasonable  to  suppose,  that 
Paul  would,  in  Jerusalem  itself,  the  very  place  from  which,  in  com- 
pany with  others,  he  set  out  for  Damascus  clothed  with  public  au- 
thority, and  in  the  presence  of  a  populace  who  were  exasperated 
against  him,  relate  the  celestial  vision  which  appeared  to  him  on  this 
journey,*  and  appeal  to  the  sanhedrim,  by  whose  command  he 
travelled  thither  f  if  it  had  not  been  a  notorious  fact,^  that  some- 
thing extraordinary  occurred  to  him  on  the  way,  and  if  his  fellow 
travellers  had  not  been  compelled  to  testify  that  he  suddenly  be- 
came blind,  and  that  they  were  obliged  to  lead  him  V  Of  the  truth 
of  his  account  of  his  recovering  his  sight,  they  needed  not  testi- 
mony, for  they  had  ocular  demonstration. 

The  reader  may  find  the  history  of  the  conversion  of  the  apostle 
Paul,  treated  in  different  ways,  and  viewed  in  various  lights,  in  the 
works  of  Eckermann,  Ammon,  Eichhorn,  Staudlin,^  Hensler,* 
Schmidt,*^  Haselaar,^^  Cludius,*'-^  and  Heinrich.^^  In  refutation  of  the 
rash  hypothesis  of  the  author  of  "the  History  of  the  great  Prophet 
of  Nazareth,"  namely,  "  That  the  appearance  of  Christ  to  Paul,  was 
not  after  Christ's  ascension  to  heaven,  but  during  the  lifetime  of 
Jesus  ;"  see  the  remarks  on  the  work  entitled,  "  The  risen  Jesus,'^ 
the  "  Supplement  to  the  natural  history  of  the  great  Prophet  of 
Nazareth,"  in  Tiib.  gel.  Anzeig.*^  and  "  The  history  of  primitive 
Christianity,  in  connexion  with  the  natural  history  of  the  great 
Nazarene  Prophet."^^ 

III.  24.  Acts  13:  9—12.  14:  8—11.  19:  11,  12.  28:  3—10. 
comp.  Rom.  15:  18,  19. 

I  Acts  9:  1—3,  21.  22:  5,  G.  26:  12,  13.  2  Acts  22:  5. 
3  Acts  9:  21.  Gal.  1:  23.  4  Acts  ch.  22.  5  Acts  22:  5. 
6  Acts  26:  26.  V.  9  etc.                    7  Acts  22:  9—11. 

8  Geschichte  der  Sittenlehre  Jesu,  B.  I.  S.  715  ff. 

9  '•  The  truth  and  divinity  of  Christianity,"  p.  83  etc.  Keil,  1803. 

10  Introd.  to  the  New  Test.  Ft.  I.  p.  187  etc.  Compare  the  Tobing.  gel.  An- 
zeigen,  for  1807,  p.  203. 

II  Dissert,  exegetica  de  nonnullis  Actonim  apostolicorum  et  epp.  Paulinarum 
ad  historian!  Pauli  pertinentibus  locis,  1806.  Comp.  the  Haller  Lit.  Zeit.  No. 
90,  for  1809. 

12  Uransichten  des  Christenthums,  Altona,  1808.  s.  134  ff. 

13  Nov.  Test,  perpetua  annotatione  illustratum,  Acta  Apostol.  P.  I.  ad  Act.  9. 
"Jesu  universal  religion."  S.  44  ff.  Leipsic,  1811. 

H  For  1803.  p.  93  etc.  15  Vol.  1. 1807.  Tab.  gel.  Anz.  1808,  p.  315. 


10*]  DIVINE  AtTTHORlTY  OF  THE  APOSTLE  PAUL.  141 


III.  25.     Miraculous  spiritual  gifts. 

The  apostle  Paul  could  appeal,  and  without  the  least  fear  of  con- 
radiction,  ev^en  to  his  enemies,  for  the  reality  of  those  rniraculous 
piritual  gifts/  which  were  bestowed  on  the  Corinthians'-^  by  his  in- 
U-umentality,  and  of  which  he  speaks  at  large  in  the  14th  ch.  of 
lis  first  epistle  to  those  Christians.  This  subject  is  discussed  by 
he  author  of  this  work,  in  a  Dissertation  "  on  The  spiritual  gifts  of 
he  Corinthian  Christians,"  inserted  in  "  Paulus'  Neuem  Repertori- 
m"  for  Biblical  and  Oriental  Literature,  Ft.  III.  No.  IX.  The 
ibject  of  that  dissertation,  is  to  vindicate  the  supernatural  origin  and 
he  importance  of  these  gifts,  against  the  positions  maintained  in 
Cichhorn's  Bibliotheca  of  biblical  literature.  Vol.  II.  p.  757  etc. 
md  Paulus'  Dissertation  "  On  the  foreign  languages  of  the  first 
:;hristians,"  in  the  same  Repertorium,  Ft.  I.  No.  VI.  Ft.  II.  No. 
/"III.  and  hkewise  against  a  dissertation  in  the  ''  Contributions  for 
he  promotion  of  rational  views  of  religion,"  No.  XIV.  On  the 
seculiar  fitness  of  this  kind  of  miracles,  the  following  remarks  are 
laade  in  the  346th  and  following  pages  of  this  dissertation  :  1)  The 
lairaculous  communication  of  certain  spiritual  gifts,  was  peculiarly 
useful  in  establishing  the  authority  of  the  apostles  ;  because  it  was 
(iOt  of  so  transient  a  nature  as  the  other  miracles,  and  because  by  it 
[,n  apostle  could  exert  an  agency  without  being  himself  present. 
))  The  absolute  truth  of  the  apostolical  miracles  was  more  fully  es- 
ablished,  when  the  apostles  bestowed  on  some  members  of  the  dif- 
lerent  congregations,  power  to  perform  similar  miracles.  3)  The 
uthority  of  the  apostles  could  thus  be  established  by  miracles,  in 
:ountries  where  they  had  themselves  never  been,  if  some  of  the  in- 
labitants  of  such  countries  meeting  the  apostles  elsewhere,  and  re- 
.eiving  from  them  this  gift,  returned  in  possession  of  it  to  their 
espective  homes.  4)  The  immediate  influence  of  God  on  the 
mowledge  of  the  apostles  and  on  their  teaching,  was  rendered  the 
acre  credible,  by  the  similar  experience  of  those  members  of  the 
different  churches  who  had  received  any  kind  of  prophetic  gifts. 

III.  26.  Acts  14:  3,  zro  kvqim  ko  f^agTVQOvvxiTMXoyco  t^g  xa- 
Hiog  avTOV,  dtdovxt  Gruxeia  :aou  xtQaxa  yevi'aifat  dia  tujv  xecgojv  av- 
xZv  the  Lord,  who  bore  testimony  to  the  doctrine  of  his  grace  per- 
•brming  signs  and  wonders  by  their  hands.  A  similar  expression 
s  used  Mark  16:  20,  14,  concerning  the  other  apostles.  Actions 
t^rhich  evidently  transcended  the  power  of  men,  were  conclusive  evi- 
dence of  the  truth  of  what  the  apostles  declared,  that  they  were 
not  left  to  their  own  power ;  and  they  prove  that  these  men  were 

1  2  Cor.  12:  12.  Gal.  3:  5.  Heb.  2:  3,  4.  2  1  Cor.  12:  8-10. 


142  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 


actually  under  the  influence  of  a  superior  being,  to  whom  they  at- 
tributed not  only  their  doctrines  (<§>  9,  10),  but  also  those  visible 
miracles  which,  in  accordance  with  the  declaration  of  Jesus  (John 
14:  12—14),  they  performed.  Acts  3:  12,  13,  16.  4:  7—10,  24, 
30.  9:  34,  40,  (here  Peter  prayed  to  God,  and  thereby  showed 
that  he  expected  him  to  perform  the  miracle.)  Acts  13:  11,  x^^Q 
nvQiov  inl  aa  the  hand  of  the  Lord  is  upon  you,  14:  10 — 15.  comp. 
V.  8—14,  and  Heb.  2:  4,  and  Rom.  14:  18  etc.  Acts  19:  11.  1 
John  5:  6.  Vide  above  <§>  9. 

III.  27.  2  Cor.  12:  12,  ra  otjfidTa  rov  dnoozoXov  xatet^yccad^i] 
iv  v^lv  the  signs,  or  miraculous  works  of  an  apostle,  were  perform- 
ed among  you. 

III.  28.  Gal.  2:  6 — 9,  *Jai(Ci}(3og  aal  Kriq.ag  nal  'lojuvvrig — di^t- 
ag  td(x)xav  ifAol  xoivioviag  James  and  Cephas  and  John — gave  me 
the  right  hand  of  fellowship  ;  comp.  2  Peter  3:  15.  On  the  divine 
mission  of  Paul,  the  reader  may  consult  the  work  of  Kleuker,  enti- 
tled, "  Die  Glaubwiirdigkeit  der  Schriftlichen  Urkunden  des  Chris- 
tenthums,"  Vol.  II.  <5.  565— 598.  Riga,  1794. 


SECTION  XI. 

Divine  authority  of  the  apostolical  writings. 

If  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles  (<§>  9,  10)  possess  divine  authority, 
the  same  authority  must  belong  also  to  their  writings.  Because,  in 
the  first  place,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  language,  the  words 
XaXHv{\)  and  7rapaxaA6f*'(2)  and  other  similar  expressions  (men- 
tioned in  "§.9,  10),  refer  as  well  to  written  (3)  expressions  as  to  oral 
instructions.  Moreover,  it  is  very  evident  from  the  nature  of  the 
case  itself,  that  the  only  difierence,(4)  between  their  writings  and 
oral  instructions  was,  that  the  former  were  of  a  more  permanent  na- 
ture, and  therefore  of  more  extensive  importance  than  the  latter. 
Nor  can  any  reason  be  assigned,  why  as  soon  as  the  apostles  began 
to  write,  they  should  immediately  lose  all  that  knowledge  which 
they  had  previously  possessed,  and  which  they  had  derived(5) 
from  the  instructions  of  Christ,  or  of  that  Spirit  who  after  his  death 


«§>   11.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  APOSTLE  PAUL.  143 

was  sent  down  from  heaven  ;  or  why  this  then-  constant  guide,  who 
at  all  other  times  assisted  them  in  the  discharge  of  their  official  du- 
ties, should  withdraw  from  them  his  aid  the  moment  they  attempted 
to  write(6).  Finally,  we  read  expressly,  that  they  composed  their 
books,  if  not  by  the  express  command(7),  yet  under  the  special  in- 
fluence of  God(8).  Thus  when  the  apostle  Paul  (2  Cor.  11:  17. 
comp.  ^  10  lUust.  18)  explicitly  permits  his  readers  to  consider  as 
uninspired,  so  much  of  his  epistle  as  embraced  his  self  commenda- 
tions ;  this  very  limitation  implies,  that  he  intended  his  written  in- 
structions generally  should  be  received  as  the  instructions  of  God(9). 

III.  1.     Matt.  10:  20.  comp.  1  Cor.  2:  13.  2  Cor.  2:  17.  13:3. 

III.  2.  2  Cor.  5:  20,  ojg  tov  dsov  na^axalovviog  di  T^f^oJv  as  if 
God  were  exhorting  through  us. 

III.  3.  2  Cor.  11:  17.  12: 19  Acts.  26:  22.  2  Pet.  1:  21.  comp. 
V.  20.  In  all  these  passages  XaXelv  is  used  of  written  communications. 
Heb.  13:  22,  tov  Xoyov  rng  naguiiXriGiMg  the  word  of  exhortation. 
2 Cor.  10:  H,  iMXoya)  dt  IuigtoXwv  in  word  by  my  epistles.  Acts 
15:  15.  oiXoyoi'TMi/  uQocpritoJv  the  words  of  the  prophets. 

III.  4.  Paul  lays  equal  stress  on  the  naQadoaeigdta  Xoyov  tradi- 
tions inculcated  by  word,  and  on  nagadoasig  dc  ini'GToXfjg  traditions 
inculcated  by  letter,  2  Thess.  2:  1 5. 

III.  5.  That  the  apostles,  whenever  they  attempted  to  write, 
were  not  divested  of  that  supernatural  aid  and  knowledge  which  they 
previously  possessed,  is  evident  from  1  John  1:  1 — 3.  The  pas- 
sage refers  to  the  things  which  John,  as  an  eye  and  ear-witness  of 
the  history  of  Jesus,  had  committed  to  writing,  in  his  Gospel.  See 
Eph.  3:  3,  4.  2  Pet.  3:  15. 

III.  6.  That  the  aids  of  the  Spirit  were  not  withdrawn  from 
them  whenever  they  sat  down  to  write,  is  evident  from  1  Cor.  7:  40, 
where  Paul  states,  that  the  written  advice  which  he  imparts  to  them 
(in  V.  25  etc.),  he  gives  as  a  man  who  enjoyed,  (as  the  other  apos- 
tles did),  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 

III.  7.  According  to  Rev.  1:  11,  the  apostle  John  received  an 
express  command  from  Christ,  to  commit  to  writing,  the  things 
which  he  had  seen  and  heard  ;  (the  same  was  the  case  of  Jeremiah 


[ 


144         DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

in  the  O.  T.  chap,  36  ;)  and  in  the  conclusion  of  the  book  (Rev. 
22:  18 — 20)  Christ  himself  pronounces  the  whole  to  be  his  work.^ 
Those  writings  of  the  apostles  which  were  composed  without  any 
special  command,  were  nevertheless  written  by  the  command  of 
Christ ;  for  they  were  composed  by  virtue  of  that  general  commis- 
sion which  was  given  to  the  apostles.     Rom.  1:  5,  6.  15:  15,  16. 

III.  8.     The   apostles   aliuays   wrote  under   the  influence  of  the 

Holy  Spirit, 

The  nature  of  this  influence,  has  already  been  stated,  in  <§>  9,  10. 
The  apostles  doubtless  thought  for  themselves,  that  is,  exercised 
their  natural  faculties  and  communicated  their  own  thoughts,  both 
in  their  oral  and  written  instructions.  Still,  these  instructions  are  to 
be  considered  rather  the  instructions  of  God,  than  of  the  apostles ; 
compare  «§>  9.  Illust.  15.  •§>  10.  For  the  substance  or  matter  of 
them  was  for  the  most  part  communicated  to  them,  if  not  at  the 
moment  when  they  were  speaking  or  writing,  yet  previously,  either 
by  Christ  during  his  abode  with  them  on  earth,  or  by  the  Spirit  of 
God.  Moreover  this  perpetual  Coadjutor  exercised  a  constant  su- 
perintendance  over  all  their  communications  both  oral  and  written  ; 
and  where  any  thing  escaped  their  memory,  recalled  it  (John  14: 
26)  ;  and  where  there  was  ignorance  or  error  in  their  views,  aiFord- 
ed  them  the  necessary  instruction  (John  14:  26.  19:  13)  ;  thus 
preventing  the  omission  of  any  thing  which  the  Spirit  of  God  would 
have  them  communicate,  and  guarding  them  effectually  against  im- 
perfect or  erroneous  exhibitions  of  those  truths  which  they  had  re- 
ceived from  the  Lord,  whereby  the  credibility  and  the  divine  author- 
ity of  their  instructions  generally,  would  have  been  rendered  doubt- 
ful. An  instance  of  an  apostle's  uttering  a  truth  which  he  did  not 
comprehend  (  1  Pet.  1:  10 — 12),  under  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit, 
occurs  in  Acts  2:  39.  For  in  this  passage,  by  To7g  in  fianguv  (those 
afar  off),  to  whom  belonged  the  promise  which  was  to  be  fulfilled 
through  Christ  Jesus,  the  Spirit  evidently  intended  for  the  Gentiles  ; 
but  it  was  not  till  some  time  after  this,  that  Peter  became  fully  con- 
vinced (Acts  10:  20,  28,  29,  34),  that  the  Gentiles  were  to  be  par- 
takers of  the  blessings  purchased  by  Christ.  As  the  apostles  were 
to  be  infallible  teachers,  and  their  instructions  to  be  received  as  com- 
ing from  God  (  1  Thess.  2:  13.  4:  8),  to  ensure  perfect  accuracy 
to  their  communications,  the  superintending  influence  of  the  Spirit 
might  be  necessary,  even  when  they  were  inculcating  doctrines 
which  had  been  revealed  to  them  at  a  former  period,  or  which  they 
had  learned  in  some  other  way.     This  is  evident  from  the  example 

1  New  Apology  for  the  Revelation  of  John,  p.  361  etc. 


^  11.]     DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OP  THE  APOSTOLICAL  WRITINGS.        145 

of  those  Tyrian  prophets  mentioned  Acts  21:  4.  The  advice  which 
they,  dod  nveijfxuiog  through  the  Spirit,  gave  to  the  apostle  Paul, 
aamely,  that  he  should  not  go  up  to  Jerusalem,  did  indeed  involve 
some  truth,  namely,  that  imprisonment  awaited  him  there  Acts  20: 
23.  21:  11)  ;  but  this  truth,  which  they  had  received  from  divine 
revelation,  they  distorted  by  combining  with  it  their  own  wishes  and 
counsels.  Their  advice  contradict'cd  what  Paul  declares  concern- 
ing Irimself,  that  he  went  up  to  Jerusalem  being  constrained  by  \he 
Spirit  to  do  so,  dedentvog  tm  nvavfiaio  "  per  Spiritum  dogor,  et  quasi 
vinculis  constringor,  ut  non  possim  non  Hierosolymam  proficisci,"  I 
•am  compelled  by  the  Spirit,  and  as  it  were  held  in  chains,  so  that  I 
cannot  avoid  going  to  Jerusalem.^  Morus  thinks  Paul  is  to  be  un- 
derstood thus :  "  Parare  se  raolestiis  animum  debere,  non  autem 
propter  molestias  plane  efFugere  locum,^'  that  he  ought  to  prepare 
his  mind  to  encounter  difficulties,  but  not  through  fear  of  those  diffi- 
culties, to  avoid  the  place.  Those  Tyrian  prophets  were  persons 
to  whom  God  now  and  then  revealed  something,  but  who  did  not 
enjoy  tlie  constant  guidance  and  teaching  of  the  Spirit  of  God, — 
they  were  such  prophets  as  Paul  mentions  1  Cor.  14:  29, 30.  comp. 
12:  10.  From  the  danger  of  thus  adulterating  the  revelations  which 
they  received  froni  God,  the  apostles  were  preserved  by  the  Spirit 
of  God,  their  inseparable  assistant.  This  Spirit,  for  example,  pre- 
vented them  from  using  expressions  suggested  by  the  additions 
which  their  reasoning  might  make  to  the  revelations  tliey  received 
from  God.  He  excited  in  them  a  suspicion  of  all  such  id-eas  as  ori- 
ginated from  themselves,  and  thus  led  them  to  select  other  expres- 
sions, which,  whilst  they  accorded  with  their  own  ideas  and  habits  of 
expression-,  harmonized  perfectly  with  the  truth,  and  with  the  pur- 
poses of  the  divine  Spirit.  In  this  way,  it  may  be  seen,  that  while 
the  Spirit  of  God  prevented  any  false  propositions  or  expressions 
from  escaping  the  apostles,  opportunity  was  afforded,  even  in  the 
communication  of  truths  immediately  inspired,  for  each  apostle  to 
manifest  that  peculiarity  of  thought  and  expression  by  which  he  was 
distinguished  from  the  others.  Certain  it  is,  that  as  far  as  the  credi- 
bility of  the  apostolical  instructions  is  concerned,  it  is  a  matter  of 
perfect  indifference,  whether  we  believe  that  the  Spirit  of  God  sug- 
gested the  very  words  in  which  those  instructions  were  uttered  or 
written,  or  whether  the  Spirit  only  guided  and  aided  them,  from 
time  to  time,  so  far  as  was  necessary.  The  former  supposition, 
however,  does  not  seem  to  comport  with  the  diversity  of  style  and 
arrangement  in  the  apostolical  writings.^ 


1  See  Kypke's  Observat.  Sacr.  on  the  passage. 

jhe  ' 
Th. 

19 


2  Tollner  Ober  die  gottliche  Eingebunjr  der  Hciligen  Schrift,  §  59-H65.  Cru- 
fiius'  Theologia  propheiica,  Th.  I.  §  42.  No.  17—20.  Koppen,  "  The  Bible  a  work 


146  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK. 


Note.  In  the  Dissertation  of  the  author  "  On  the  miraculous  spir- 
itual gifts  of  the  Corinthians,"  (in  Paulus'  Neuem  Repertorium  fiir 
biblische  und  morgenl'andische  Literatur,  Th  III.  p.  331 — 334),  it 
is  remarked,  that  the  diaxgiotg  nvsvfiutwv  the  gift  of  discerning  spir- 
its, mentioned  in  1  Cor.  14:  29.  12:  10,  consisted  in  an  ability  to 
discover  whether  the  prophets,  in  their  oral  instructions,  (XaXovvzeg 
14:  29)  adhered  strictly  to  the  revelations  they  had  received,  or 
whether  they  mingled  with  them  something  inconsistent  with  the  in- 
tentions of  tHe  spirit  that  had  given  them  the  revelation,  and  who 
was  now  active  in  the  minds  of  the  diaxgivovrcov  the  discerners  or 
the  discriminators  of  real  revelations.  Thus  the  discerner,  o  diaxQi- 
vcDv,  discriminated  among  the  nviv^aia  the  gifts  of  the  prophets, 
what  was  really  prophecy  {ngocfriTala)  from  what  was  a  human  ad- 
dition. In  this  manner,  by  means  of  the  diazQiGtwv  nviv^axtav^ 
whatever  God  revealed  to  a  prophet  of  this  class,  became  exactly 
known.  From  these  prophets  7iQoq)^iTCiig^  the  apostles  were  dis- 
tinguished by  the  possession  of  many  spiritual  gifts  united  (1  Cor. 
14:  16),  and  by  their  infallibility  in  the  exhibition  of  the  views 
which  were  given  them. 

III.  9.  2  Cor.  7:  9 — 11,  Kara  '&t6v.  Kara  here  indicates  the 
author  of  the  sorrow  mentioned,  or  the  agent  by  whom  it  was  produ- 
ced. But  in  V.  8,  Paul  mentions  himself  as  the  author  of  their  sor- 
row (Jy(a  hvn7}Ga  vfxag)  ;  of  course  he  maintains,  that  he,  acting 
under  a  divine  impulse  (auctore  Deo)  had  occasioned  them  this  sor» 
row. 


SECTION    XII. 


Divine  authority  of  the  writings  of  MarJc  and  Luke, 

Although  what  has  been  said  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  (<5>  9 
— 11)  relative  to  the  extraordinary  guidance  of  the  apostles,  can- 
not be  predicated  of  the  writings  of  Mark  and  Luke  ;  the  fact  that 
their  statements  are  historically  true  and  entitled  to  our  confidence, 
is  established  by  the  evidence  stated  in  'J'  5.  It  appears  also  that 
we  may  justly  ascribe  to  them  divine  authority.  For(l)  the  apostle 
Peter  read  and  sanctioned  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  which  was  written 
under  his  superintendance.     And,  in  like  manner,  the  historical 

of  divine  wisdom,  Pt.  II.  p.  397.  Roos'  "  Evidence  that  the  whole  Bible  is  inspir- 
ed," p.  139.  Plank's  Introduction  to  the  Theological  Sciences,  Pt.  I.  p.  404—409. 


^  12.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  MARK  AND  LUKE.  147 

works  of  Luke,  one  of  which  relates  principally  to  the  apostle  Paul, 
doubtless  received  the  perusal  and  the  sanction  of  this  apostle. (2) 
Finally,  the  apostle  John  expressed  the  wish,  that  the  Christians 
should  have  in  their  possession,  the  Gospels  of  Mark  and  Luke,  as 
well  as  his  own  and  that  of  the  apostle  Matthew,(3)  and  that  the 
two  former  should  be  used  in  connexion  with  the  latter.(4) 

III.  1.  The  sanction  of  an  apostle  must,  necessarily,  confer  di- 
vine authority  on  any  work  on  which  it  was  bestowed,  though  not 
written  by  an  apostle.  Matt.  16:  19.  Compare  Tollner  sup.  cit. 
<§,  10. 

III.  2.  As  the  Gospel  of  Luke  and  the  Acts  of  the  apostles 
were  written,  at  the  time  when  Paul  was  prisoner  at  Rome  and 
Luke  resident  with  him,  it  is  highly  probable  that  Paul  must  have 
read  and  sanctioned  them.     Compare  supra  <§>  5.  lUust.  2,  6. 

III.  3.  Those  who  doubt  whether  the  apostolical  Gospels,  so 
far  as  they  are  narratives  of  facts  y  are  clothed  with  divine  authority, 
cannot  justly  appeal  in  support  of  their  opinion  to  John  14:  26, 
6  nccgaxlriiog  vnofivrjaei  ifiag  navta  a  elnov  vfuv  the  Monitor  will 
remind  you  of  all  things  which  I  have  spoken  to  you.  For,  when 
Christ  here  specifies  the  things  which  he  said,  he  does  not  thereby 
exclude  the  things  which  he  did,  or  the  events  which  took  place  ; 
but  it  was  his  aim  to  show  the  close  connexion  between  his  doctrines 
and  the  instructions  of  the  naQdiikf]Tog,  the  future  constant  guide 
and  supporter  of  his  disciples;  he  wished  to  show  that  his  instruc- 
tions were  the  ground  work  of  the  future  instructions  of  the  Spirit, 
and  that  the  latter  coincided  perfectly  with  the  former  (John  16: 
13 — 15.)  Moreover,  according  to  this  very  passage,  the  nagdaXj^Tog 
was  to  teach  the  apostles  every  thing  which  was  necessary  for  the 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  their  office,  dMlet  n  d  v  t  a;  he  there- 
fore undoubtedly  taught  them  the  history  of  Jesus,  so  far  as  they 
were  not  fully  acquainted  with  it,  and  so  far  as  their  office,  in  the 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  which  they  were  to  be  constantly  sup- 
ported by  the  naQciiiXrjTog,  required  them  to  promulgate  this  history. 
But  that  the  history  of  Jesus  formed  an  essential  part  of  the  apos- 
tolical doctrine,  is  evident  from  the  gospel  of  John,  in  which  the 
truth  of  the  doctrines  inculcated,  is  proved  historically,  or  by  ap- 
pealing to  the  actions  of  Jesus ;  indeed  this  Gospel  itself  is  not 
merely  a  historical,  but  a  doctrinal  and  polemical  book  ;^  for  the 

1  In  the  first  chapter  of  the  first  part  of  the  work  on  "  the  Objoct  of  St.  John," 
it  is  shown  (§  3 — 19,)  that  this  Gospel  was  written  against  the  disciples  of  John 
the  Baptist  and  the  Cerinthians.  In  the  second  chapter  of  the  same  Part,  the 
historical  object  of  this  Gospel  is  developed. 


148  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I, 


primary  object  of  Jahn^s  Gospel  was,  to  establish  the  fact  that 
Jesus  isthe  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  (John  20:  31.)  For  this  pur- 
posCy  St.  Jalm  selected  the  most  remarkable  from  among  the  na- 
meroiis  miracles  of  Jesus,  or  those  which  were  best  adapted,  to  es^ 
tablish  the  declarations  of  Jesus  concerning  himself,  in  consequence 
of  their  greater  publicity,  and  the  express  avowal  of  the  object  of 
them  which  accompanied  their  performance.  At  tlie  very  com- 
mencement of  the  Gospel,  the  doctrine  is  distinctly  proposed^  for 
the  proof  of  which  the  subsequent  narrative  was  composed.  And 
the  first  epistle  of  John,  which  properly  constitutes  the  second  part 
of  his  Gospel,  developes  the  inferences  from  the  argumentation  con- 
tained in  the  Gospel.^  The  facts  related  in  the  Gospels  are  there- 
fore intimately  connected  with  the  doctrines^  and  highly  necessary 
to  a  right  understanding  and  to  the  proof  of  them.  Finally,  Jesus 
himself  and  his  apostles  attributed  divine  authority  to  the  whole 
Old  Testament,  the  greater  part  of  which  is  historical,  and  by  ho 
means  superior  to  the  apostolical  writings.  Matt.  11:9 — 11.  2  Tim. 
3:  14,  15.  See  <§>  13  infra. 

III.  4»     The  testimony  of  St.  John  in  favour  of  the  writings  of 
Mark  and  Luke, 

In  the  work  on  the  Object  of  John's  Gospel,  I  advanced  the  as- 
sertion, that  John  had  the  other  Gospels  before  him  when  compos- 
ing his  own,  and  that  he  wished  those  Gospels  to  be  used  in  con- 
nexion with  his.  To  this  assertion  I  still  adhere.  Michaelis,^ 
Gresinger^^  and  Hug"^  are  of  the  same  opinion.^     The  objection  to 

1  Various  representations  of  the  doctrinal  object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  may 
Be  seen  in  the  works  of  Hanlein,  Paulus,  Hug.  Agreeably  to  Herder's  opinion, 
with  which  Eichhorn  in  substance  agrees,  "  John  wished  to  extend  and  enlairgie 
the  idea  of  the  Messiah,  whom  the  first  lliree  Gospels  had  represented  as  a  Jew- 
ish Messiah.  In  accordance  with  the  Palestine  Gospels,  he  represented  Christ 
as  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  siiowed  in  what  sense  he  was  the  Son  of  God 
and  the  source  of  eternal  happiness.  Thus  ho  gave  a  practical  aspect  to  the  old 
historical  Gospel."  3  Introd.  N.  T.  §  161.  4th  ed. 

3  Introd.  N.  T.  p.  8a etc.  4  Introd.  N.T.  Ft.  II.  p.  429—436,  Andover  ed. 

S  Paulus  (Comment,  on  John,  Vol.  I.  p.  252)  thinks  John  supposed  his  read- 
ers at  least  acquainted  with  Luke's  Gospel,  and  Eichhorn  (Introd.  to  N.  T. 
Vol  11.  §  159)  supposes  lie  considered  them  as  acquainted  with  the  Protevan- 
gelinm.  Wegscheider  (Introd.  to  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  244)  admits  that  John 
was  acquainted  with  the  other  three  Gospels,  or  with  their  original  source  ;  and 
that  he  supposed  his  renders  to  be  acquainted  with  them  ;  yet  with  this  limitation, 
that  the  apostle  depended  on  an  indistinct  recollection  of  those  other  Gospels, 
and  did  not  intend  to  make  his  Gospel  specifically  a  sappfement  to  them. 
Schmidt,  in  his  Historico-critical  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.  Pt.  I.  p.  146,  proposes  the 
adventurous  hypothesis,  "  that  John  perhaps  intended  to  complete  Marcion's 
Gospel,  which  had  been  brought  from  Asia  into  the  west;  because  the  greater 
part  of  the  narratives  which  John  has  in  common  with  the  other  three  evanget- 
ists,  were  always  wanting  in  Marcion's  Gospel,  and  often  in  that  only." 


«§>   12.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  MARK  AND  LUKE.  149 

this  opinion,  stated  in  the  "  Contributions  for  the  promotion  of  ra- 
tional views  of  religion"  (No.  XIV.  p.  10),  and  in  "  An  attempt  to 
illustrate  the  history  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  Scripture  canons" 
(Vol.  II.  192),  is  answered  in  the  Dissert,  "on  the  Occasion  and 
object  of  the  catholic  epistles,"  note  125.  The  objection  urged  in 
the  work  of  Korrodi,  against  the  opinion  that  John  had  the  three 
other  Gospels  before  him,  is  this  :  "  We  have  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve, that  if  this  had  been  the  case,  he  would  have  explained  ma- 
ny of  the  apparent  contradictions  in  them*"  But  this  objection  is 
fully  met  by  the  general  remark,  contained  in  the  Dissert,  de  epis- 
tol.  cathol.  occasione  et  consilio,  Note  125.  "Those  circumstan- 
ces, which  it  is  necessary  for  the  reader  to  suppose,  in  order  to 
solve  apparent  contradictions,  were  so  familiar  to  the  writer,  who 
was  an  eyewitness  of  the  incidents  which  he  relates,  that  he  never 
thought  of  those  apparent  contradictions  which  are  so  observable  by 
a  reader  who  is  unacquainted  with  those  explanatory  circumstances." 
Yet  in  chap.  18:  25,  John  actually  explains  and  harmonizes  Matt. 
26:  71  {aXXf]  naidiaycfj  another  maid),  and  Mark  14:  69  {^  ncitdiaK?] 
—naliv  the  maid — again),  and  Luke  22:  58  (aUo?  another)  ;  by 
remarking  that  several  persons  assailed  Peter,  elnov  avi^  they  said 
to  him.^ 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  evidence  for  the  position  ad- 
vanced in  the  beginning  of  this  Illustration,  as  it  is  stated  in  the 
work  "  On  the  object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,"  «5>  52,  53,  70,  71.— 
It  is  indeed  an  erroneous  saying,  found  in  Eusebius^  and  Jerome,^ 
that  John  explicitly  approved  and  sanctioned  the  Gospel  of  Mat- 
thew, Mark  and  Luke  (dnodilaG&ui  avia^  dlrjdftav  avtolg  ini^ag- 
xvQYiaavTa) ;  but 

1.  The  internal  arrangement  of  John's  Gospel  evinces,  that  he 
supposed  his  readers  acquainted  with  other  Gospels  ;  and  moreover 
gives  us  some  reason  to  believe,  that  those  other  Gospels  were  ex- 
actly the  three  which  we  possess.  For,  first,  many  of  the  things 
which  he  supposes  to  be  already  known,  and  which  therefore  he 
does  not  repeat,  are  precisely  such  as  are  contained  in  the  other 
Gospels  ;  e.  g.  the  imprisonment  of  John  the  Baptist  (John  3:  24), 
the  manner  in  which  Jesus  procured  a  young  ass  (12: 14,  16)  ;  and 
in  21:  2  he  assumes  as  known  to  his  readers,  that  there  was  a  stone 
before  the  sepulchre  of  Jesus  ;  and  that  there  were  other  women  at 
the  grave,  besides  Mary  Magdalene,  oux  oidafiev  we  know  not. 
Michaelis,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  adduces  oth- 
er additional  evidence  of  the  same  position.^     Again,  he  omits  some 

1  See  Note  4  on  the  preceding  page.  2  Hist.  Eccles.  Ill,  24. 

3  De  viris  Illustribus,  s.  v.  Johannes. 

4  Pt.  II.  §  161.  e.  g.  John  1:  32—34,  whore  the  history  of  the  baptism  of  Jesus 
is  presupposed  to  be  known. 


150  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I 

narratives  which  are  contained  in  the  other  Gospels,  and  whicF 
would  have  been  very  serviceable  to  his  polemical  object  5  e.  g.  the 
explanation  ot^  Jesus  to  the  disciples  of  John  (Matt.  11:  2  etc.) 
the  miracles  at  the  death  of  Jesus  (Matt.  27:  45,  51) ;  the  super- 
natural conception  of  Jesus,  recorded  by  Luke  and  Matthew  ;  hij 
ascension  to  heaven — which,  however,  is  referred  to  in  ch.  6:  62. 
20:  17. — Michaelis  adds  the  following  to  the  list  of  incidents  omit- 
ted by  John  :  the  decapitation  of  John  the  Baptist ;  the  election  oi 
the  twelve  apostles ;  the  transfiguration  of  Jesus  ;  and  the  institutior 
of  the  sacred  Supper.  In  other  parts  of  his  narration,  he  omits  im- 
portant circumstances  which  are  recorded  by  the  other  evangelists 
e.  g.  the  miraculous  cure  of  the  ear  of  the  highpriesl's  servant 
(Luke  22:  51,  comp.  John  18:  10) ;  the  last  exclamation  of  Jesus 
(Luke  23:  16) :  and  the  loud  voice  with  which  it  was  uttered  (Mark 
15:  37). — In  cases  where  the  connexion  of  his  subject  would  not 
permit  him  entirely  to  omit  a  narrative  contained  in  the  other  evan- 
gelists, he  gives  a  very  brief  sketch  of  it.  Compare  John  18:  39. 
40,  with  Luke  23:  17—23  and  Mark  5:  6—14.  Finally,  he  con- 
tributes materials  which  render  the  others  more  perfect  and  com- 
plete ;  e.  g.  the  name  Malchus  ch.  18:  10  (In  this  chapter,  v.  24 
should  precede  v.  15,  according  to  th»  order  of  events  ;  hence 
tntaxeiXe  (v.  24)  must  be  rendered,  miserat  had  sent).  In  general, 
the  greater  part  of  the  discourses  and  transactions  of  our  Lord  fall 
within  this  remark. 

2.  As  it  is  certain  from  Irenaeus,  that  the  Gospels  of  Matthew, 
Mark  and  Luke  were,  at  an  early  period,  used  in  connexion  with 
the  Gospel  of  John,  and  by  those  very  churches  in  Asia  Minor 
among  which  John  resided  till  his  death,  and  in  the  midst  of  which 
he  wrote  his  Gospel ;  it  is  extremely  probable  that  these  three  Gos- 
pels, and  no  others,  were  those  which  John  supposed  his  readers  to 
be  acquainted  with.  For  had  other  Gospels  been  referred  to  by 
him,  they  would  not,  for  this  very  reason,  so  soon  have  lost  their 
authority  among  those  churches. 

3.  At  the  time  when  John  wrote  his  Gospel,  the  other  three 
could  have  been  known  in  Asia,  for  a  long  time ;  for  the  Gospels  of 
Matthew  and  Mark  were  probably  written  about  the  time  spoken  of 
Acts  11:  12,  and  of  course  while  John  yet  resided  in  Jerusalem 
(Gal.  2:  9.  comp.  Acts  ch.  15).  And  the  Gospel  of  Luke  might 
easily  have  been  known  in  Asia  previous  to  the  composition  of 
John's  Gospel,  <§>  5.  Illust.  6. 

4.  But  if  John  did  presuppose  in  his  readers  a  knowledge  of  the 
other  three  Gospels,  and  in  the  composition  of  his  own  evidently 
acknowledged  their  authority,  as  we  have  stated  above(l)  ;  this  is 
a  tacit  and  virtual  approbation  of  them  all,  and  of  course  of  the  Gos- 


§13.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  151 

pels  of  Mark  and  Luke,  which  is  quite  as  decisive  as  an  express 
sanction  of  them. 


SECTION   XIII, 


Divine  authority  of  the  Old  Testament, 

The  very  same  kind  of  arguments  which  proves  the  divine  au- 
thority of  the  writings  of  Mark  and  Luke  (<§>  12),  will  also  prove 
the  divine  authority  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  ;(1)  for 
they  have  alike  received  the  sanction  of  men  whose  credentials  were 
divine.  As  it  has  been  proved  (<§»>§>  6 — 11),  that  the  religious  in- 
structions of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  are  of  divine  authority,  it  fol- 
lows that  all  their  declarations,  and  of  course  their  assertions  relative 
to  the  Old  Testament, (2)  must  be  received  implicitly  as  being  ac- 
cordant with  truth.  But  Jesus  and  his  apostles  not  only  declare 
that  God  is  the  author  of  the  Mosaic  LawS;(3)  but  they  receive 
other  parts  of  the  writings  of  Moses  as  true  ;(4)  not  excepting  his 
account  of  events  which  took  place  before  his  birth  ;{5)  and  they 
assume  that  the  books  of  Moses  were  written  at  the  special  in- 
stance(6)  of  God,  and  under  his  particular  guidance. (7)  They  as- 
sert that  the  Pentateuch, (8)  and  the  sacred  books  of  the  Jews  in 
general, (9)  contain  divine  predictions,(10) — (not  the  conjectures 
and  fictions  of  men),(ll) — which  are  therefore(l2)  prophecies  of 
indisputable  certainty. (13)  And  not  only  the  prophecies,  but  the 
whole  of  the  Old  Testament,  all  its  moral  instructions,(14)  its  nar- 
ratives,(15)  and  in  short,  the  whole  contents  of  the  book,  whether 
prophetic,  doctrinal,  or  historical,  and  even  the  very  expressions  us- 
ed,(16)  they  assume  as  indisputably  true. (17)  And  this  claim  of 
the  Old  Testament  to  our  implicit  credence,  they  found  on  the  di- 
vinity of  the  book.  (18) 

III.  1 .     The  hoolcs  of  the  New  Testament  were  reckoned  equally  sa- 
cred with  those  of  the  Old  Testament,  even  in  the  apostolic  age. 

It  is  evident  from  the  declarations  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  that 
they  ascribed  divine  authority  to  writings,  no  less  than  to  oral  com- 


152  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

munications.  Hence  it  is  the  more  improbable  that  the  promises 
of  Jesus,  and  the  declarations  of  the  apostle  (<§.  9,  10),  as  to  the  di- 
vine influence  and  aid  which  they  had  while  instructing  men,  were 
confined  to  a  part  of  their  teaching,  namely  the  oral,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  the  written.  On  the  contrary,  we  know  that  even  in  the 
apostolical  age,  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament  were  held  in  as 
high  estimation  as  those  of  the  Old.  Thus  :  I.  James,  in  his  sec- 
ond chapter  (v.  8,)  quotes  a  Gospel,  and  seems  to  have  the  passage 
Matt.  22:  39,  36,  in  his  view.  In  other  passages  also  he  seems  to 
have  his  eye  on  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  ;  compare  James  2  :  13 
with  Matt.  24:  41—45,  34—40.  James  1:  22  with  Matt.  7:  24  etc. 
James  3:  11,  12  with  Matt.  7:  15  etc.  James  5:  10  with  Matt.  5: 
12.  James  5:  12  with  Matt.  5:  34—37.  II.  In  chap.  4:  5,  James 
quotes  an  epistle  of  Paul  under  the  title  of  »J  ypagc^J.  He  seems  to 
allude  to  Gal.  5:  17  etc.  ;  and  in  the  next  verse  he  quotes,  in  con- 
junction with  it,  a  passage  from  the  Old  Testament  (Prov.  3:  34) 
with  the  expression  diaXtyei  (i.  e.  ??  ygcapi],  which  must  be  supplied 
from  the  preceding  verse.)  The  epistle  to  the  Galatians  and  the 
Proverbs  are  therefore  equally  accounted  parts  of  the  "  Holy  Scrip- 
tures." That  Gal.  5:  17  (compared  with  v.  20,  21)  is  probably  the 
passage  to  which  James  here  refers,  is  proved  in  §  III.  of  the 
dissertation  just  referred  to  in  the  margin.  For  there  is  no  passage 
in  the  Old  Testament  to  which  James  could  possibly  have  referred; 
but  this  citation  agrees  very  well  with  Gal.  5:  17  etc.  The  words 
of  Paul  TO  Tivsvfiu  IniOvfAsT  xar«  vijg  aagxog  the  spirit  lusteth  against 
the  flesh,  are  indeed  expressed  by  James,  thus :  ngog  (p-d^ovov 
InLno&HTO  nvsvi-ia  the  spirit  lusteth  to  envy  ;  yet  Paul  in  the  above 
passage,  not  only  mentions  q.d^6vov  (envy)  among  the  egyoig  rrjg 
aagaog  works  of  the  flesh  (v.  19,  20,  but  the  whole  passage  con- 
tains an  exhortation  to  brotherly  love  (v.  13,)  and  a  reprehension  of 
envy  (v.  15).  III.  Polycarp  denominates  the  book  of  Psalms  and 
the  epistle  to  the  Ephesians  alike,  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  He  says, 
"  Ut  his  scripturis  dictum  est :  Irascimini  et  nolite  peccare.  Et  sol 
non  occidat  super  iracundiam  vestram,^  i.  e.  as  it  is  said  in  these 
Scriptures :  Be  ye  angry  and  sin  not ;  and  let  not  the  sun  go  down 
upon  your  wrath.  The  first  quotation,  irascimini,  is  from  Psalm  4: 
5,  and  the  latter,  et  sol  non  etc.  from  Eph.  4:  26,  and  both  are  de- 
nominated "  Scripture."  In  the  New  Apology  for  the  Revelation, 
it  is  proved  that  there  is  a  spurious  addition  to  the  epistle  of  Poly- 
carp {§  13,)  which  Eusebius  does  not  seem  to  have  read  ;  but  that 
the  epistle  itself  is  on  that  account  by  no  means  to  be  regarded  as 
spurious. 

♦  §  XII.  Pol.  Epist. 


^   13^.]  THEORY  OF  ACCOMMODATION  EXAMINED.  153 


III.  2.  The  declarations  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles  relative  to  the 
Old  Testament^  are  not  an  accommodatioin  to  popular  opinion 
and  prejudice. 

Those  who  consider  the  declarations  of  Christ  and  his  apostles 
concerning  the  Old  Testament,  as  also  many  of  their  declarations  on 
other  subjects,  as  being  an  *'  accommodation,"  (that  is,  as  a  speaking 
in  accordance  with  the  erroneous  opinions  of  their  hearers,  who  had 
too  exalted  ideas  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  as 
not  expressing  precisely  and  truly  their  own  opinions,)  not  only 
make  a  very  arbitrary  supposition,  but  they  violate  the  fundamental 
and  unexceptionable  principles  of  interpretation,  and  deny  that  au- 
thority and  credibility  which  we  are  compelled  to  ascribe  to  both 
Jesus  and  his  apostles.  But  in  the  present  case,  there  is  an  appro- 
priate argument  against  the  supposition  of  such  aocomrnodation, 
namely,  that  precisely  the  same  language  is  used  by  Jesus  respect- 
ing the  Old  Testament  when  conversing  with  his  apostles  (Matt. 
^6:  24,  31.  Luke  22:  37.  24:  44 — 47),  and  even  in  his  prayers  to 
his  heavenly  Father  (e.  g.  John  17:  12) ;  and  likewise  by  Paul, 
when  addressing  his  confidential  friend  Timothy,  whom  he  terms 
laoipvxov^  of  the  same  mind  with  himself;  and  also  when  address- 
ing those  who  were  opposed  to  Judaism.^  See  2  Tim,  3:  15,  16. 
1  Cor.  9:  8—10.   10:  1—11.   14:  21,  34.  15:  3,  4,  25—27, 

The  principal  arguments  against  the  supposed  Accommodation  of 
Jesus  and  his  apostles,  and  which  are  fully  stated  and  defended  in 
the  works  mentioned  at  the  close  of  this  illustration,  are  the  follow- 
ing: 

I.  The  moral  character  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  renders  such  a 
supposition  inadmissible. 

II.  The  supposition,  that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  propagated  false- 
hoods under  the  garb  of  truth,  is  overturned  by  the  fact  that  mira- 
cles evinced  their  high  authority  as  teachers. 

III.  No  sure  criterion  can  be  given  which  shall  enable  us  to  dis- 
tinguish between  those  of  their  declarations  which  they  beheved 
themselves,  and  those  in  which  they  accommodated  themselves  to 
the  erroneous  notions  of  the  Jews.  The  Scriptures  no  where  make 
a  distinction  between  what  is  universally  true  ;  and  what  is  only  lo- 
cal or  temporary.  The  theory  of  accommodation  involves  the 
whole  of  revelation  in  uncertainty. 


i  Phil.  2:  20—22. 

2  In  the  Dissert,  on  the  epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (§  9),  it  is  remarked,  that 
these  epistles,  and  especially  the  first,  were  addressed  to  that  part  of  the  Corin- 
thian church,  which  were  "  of  Paul,"  and  *'of  Apollos"  (1  Cor.  3:  4),  and  which 
was  not  the  Judaizing  party. 

20 


154  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I- 

IV.  Many  of  those  coincidences  between  the  instructions  of  Christ 
and  the  Jewish  opinions,  which  have  commonly  been  referred  to  ac- 
commodation, cannot  even  be  proved  to  be  historically  true.  The 
Rabbinical  writings  which  are  appealed  to,  are  of  more  recent  origin 
than  the  age  of  Christ  and  his  apostles ;  the  works  of  Philo  and 
Josephus  do  not  uniformly  exhibit  the  ideas  which  w^ere  prevalent 
among  the  Jews  resident  in  Palestine.  Moreover,  the  representa- 
tions contained  in  these  works,  and  also  in  some  apocryphal  books, 
differ  in  a  variety  of  respects  from  the  doctrines  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. If,  however,  some  of  the  instructions  of  Jesus  and  his  apos- 
tles, did  coincide  with  the  popular  opinions  of  the  Jews,  it  by  no 
means  follows  that  they  must  therefore  have  been  erroneous.  So 
far  as  these  Jewish  opinions  were  correct,  they  were  worthy  of  the 
approbation  of  Jesus.  And  the  providence  of  God  may,  by  previ- 
ous intimations  of  them,  have  paved  the  way  for  the  reception  of 
the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Christianity. 

V.  The  necessity  for  such  accommodation  on  the  part  of  Jesus 
and  his  apostles,  cannot  be  proved. 

The  principal  authors  against  the  scheme  of  accommodation,  are 
Storr,  On  the  Historical  Sense  of  the  N.  T.  His  Dissertation  on 
the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
HaufF's  Remarks  on  Jesus'  manner  of  teaching.  Heringa,  On  the 
manner  of  teaching  practised  by  Jesus  and  his  apostles.  "  Rea- 
son and  Revelation  ;  for  reflecting  Christians,"  by  Baumgarten 
Crusius.  Plank's  Introduction  to  the  theological  sciences.  Less' 
Letters  on  certain  Theological  subjects.  Lang,  iiber  die  Prin- 
cipien  der  Beurtheilung  des  Lokalen  und  Temporellen  in  der 
christlichen  Religions-Lehre  ;  in  Flatt's  Magazine  fiir  christliche 
Dogmatik  und  Moral.  Meyer's  Attempt  to  determine  the  ques- 
tion :  How  far  are  the  doctrines  and  precepts  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment merely  of  a  local  and  temporary  character,  and  how  far  are 
they  to  be  regarded  as  universally  and  permanently  binding  ?  (This 
last  w^ork,  however,  is  often  vague  and  indistinct  in  its  representa- 
tions). Tzschirner's  Memorabilia  for  the  studies  and  pastoral  con- 
duct of  ministers. 

The  doctrine  of  accommodation,  but  with  numerous  limitations, 
has  recently  been  defended  at  full  length,  as  being  deducible  frooi 
moral  principles,  by  Vogel. 

III.  3.     Aulhorty  of  the  Mosaic  Laws. 

See  Matt.  15:  4.   Mark  7:  9,  10,  13,  and  1  Cor.  9:  8.     In  the 
latter  passage  the  words  xara  avx^QOinov  A«Aw,  stand   opposed   to 
ovo^ogtaviaXtyH;  and   the  idea  which  the  apostle  aims  to  ex- 
press, is  this :  "  the  commands  of  the  Mosaic  Law  are  not  human 
ommands."     So  in  Gal.  1:11,  xara  viv&QMTiQv  by  man,  is  oppos- 


^  13.]     WRITINGS  OP  MOSES  ACKNOWLEDGED  IN  NEW  TEST.  155 

ed  to  a  higher  revelation  from  Jesus  Christ  (v.  12).  Kypke  (on  1 
Cor.  12:  8)  has  proved  by  an  induction  of  numerous  examples,  that 
xara,  especially  in  the  phrase  xccia  &e6v  from  God,  signifies  per, 
by  or  from. 

In  Heb.  9:  8,  the  same  Mosaic  Law  is  ascribed  to  the  nvevfia 
ayiov  or  Holy  Spirit.  Nor  is  this  contradicted  by  Heb.  2:  2,  where 
the  Laws  of  Moses  are  termed  o  dt,*  ayya'^mv  lakr^^^etg  Xoyog  the 
precepts  communicated  by  angels;  for  it  was  God  who  spake  by 
the  angels. 

III.  4.     The  authority  of  the  other  writings  of  Moses, 

Compare  Matt.  22:  31  etc.  with  Exod.  3:  6;  and  John  3:  14 
with  Numb.  21:  8,  9.  In  1  Cor.  10:  1 — 11,  is  explicit  reference 
to  much  of  the  Mosaic  history  in  Exodus  and  Numbers. 

III.  5.     The  authority  of  Moses'  narratice  of  events  prior  to  his 

birth. 

Matt.  19:  4 — 6,  containinor  an  account  of  the  creation  of  man  and 
woman,  from  Gen.  chap.  2.  Acts  3:  25,  which  cites  the  promise 
to  Abraham,  recorded  Gen.  12:  3.  Rom.  4:  2 — 24,  concerning  the 
faith  of  Abraham,  as  described  Gen.  15:  6.  1  Tim.  2:  13,  14,  the 
narrative  of  the  fall  of  our  first  parents,  from  Gen.  ch.  3.  1  Cor. 
11:  8,  9,  the  creation  of  the  first  man  and  woman.  1  Pet.  3:  20. 
2  Pet.  2:  5 — 7,  the  history  of  Noah,  of  Sodom  and  of  Lot,  from 
Gen.  ch.  6—8.  Heb.  6:  13  etc.  Comp.  Gen.  22:  16.  Heb.  11: 
3—22.  Comp.  Gen.  1:  4—6,  12,  21,  22,  27,  47,  48,  50. 

III.  6.     God  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch. 

Gal.  3:  8,  ngo'idovaa  ?J  YQOicprjj  ozt  ix  jiiaziOiQ  dcxccto7  ra  ad^vrj  6 
S-^og  "  the  author  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  who  foresaw  that  God 
(he  himself)  would  pronounce  the  heathen  just,  through  faith,  gave 
Abraham  the  promise,  Through  thee  shall  all  the  nations  be  bless- 
ed." Fgaifjrj  here  signifies  the  author  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  agree- 
ably to  the  well  known  figure  of  speech  by  which  the  effect  is  put  for 
the  cause. ^  *0  •&e6g  stands  in  place  of  the  pronoun  uvrog,  just  as 
in  Hebrew,  instead  of  using  the  pronoun,  the  noun  is  reduplicated. 
Agreeably  to  this  passage,  therefore,  the  author  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures is  the  same  with  him  who  gave  Abraham  that  promise,  name- 
ly God,  Gen.  12:  1,  3.    18:  17,  18.^ 

1  Observv.  p.  15. 

2  Observv.  §  XXIII,  compare  also  1  Cor.  1:  21,  and   the  passage  of  Arrian, 
which  Raphael  adduces  in  commenting  on  2  Tim.  1:  18. 


156  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT,  [bK.  I* 

That  the  Old  Testament  was  written  by  the  particolar  influence 
of  Gody  is  evident  also  from  Rom.  4:  23  etc.  1  Cor.  10:  11. 

III.  7.  In  Gal.  3:  16,  Paul  lays  peculiar  stress  upon  the  use  of 
the  word  Gni^^ia  in  the  singular  number.  For,  a  plural  word,  e.  g. 
t]'':3  sons,  might  have  been  used  instead  of  the  Hebrew  word  2?^T 
seed.  But  God  in  his  wisdom  saw  fit  to  use  the  singular  i^"^!;  be- 
cause the  blessings  which  were  to  flov;  from  Abraham's  posterity  to 
all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  were  dependent  on  a  single  individual. 
In  Gal.  4:  21,  Paul  treats  a  portion  of  history  taken  from  Gen.  cb; 
21,  allegorically  ;  manifestly  assuming  it  to  be  a  fact,  that  the  first 
book  of  Moses,  in  addition  to  its  literal  meaning,  had  also  an  alle- 
gorical sense  ;  and  therefore  that  God,  in  the  narrative  of  this  event, 
intended  to  give  a  symbolical  prophecy  of  a  more  remote  part  of 
that  very  extensive  plan,  the  accomplishment  of  which  was  begun 
in  the  history  of  Abraham.  A  similar  example  is  found  in  Heb. 
ch.  7 ;  compare  the  author's  note  on  Heb.  7:  3. 

III.  8,     The  Prophetic  character  of  the  Mosaic  writings. 

This  is  r^ognized  by  Christ ;  see  John  5:  39,  46,  47.  Fof 
agreeably  to  the  context,  the  words  tag  ygacpag  in  v.  39,  necessarily 
refer  to  the  Mosaic  writings.  Compare  also  John  19:  36  with  Exod. 
12:  46.  In  note  (a)  of  the  Comment,  on  Heb.  10:  7,  it  is  proved, 
in  opposition  to  Rau,  that  the  evangelist  John  certainly  intended  to 
represent  the  fact  that  the  bones  of  the  crucified  Redeemer  were 
not  broken,  as  a  fulfilment  of  the  Scriptures  relating  to  him.  Conse- 
quently, that  the  precept  of  Moses  relative  to  the  Paschal  Lamb, 
must  have  been  intended  by  God,  the  author  of  this  law,  as  a  type 
of  the  death  of  Jesus.  And  even  admitting  that  Moses  did  not 
himself  understand  the  meaning  of  this  typical  prophecy,  it  is 
sufficient  that  the  Spirit  of  God  gave  an  authentic  explanation  of  it 
by  a  later  messenger,  when  the  time  to  which  it  referred  and  in 
which  it  was  to  be  accomplished,  had  arrived. 

^  III.  9.  See  Matt.  11  :  13.  Acts  26:  22,  23.  The  expression 
J  vofAog  aai  oi  nQaqirixai,  xat  Mwijoi^g  the  law  and  the  prophets  and 
Moses,  signifies  the  whole  Old  Testament.  Comp.  <§>  14.  Illust.  2. 
Acts  ]3:  29,  ajiavia  ra  mgl  avrov  yfygafAf-ie'va  all  things  which 
were  written  concerning  him ;  comp.  v.  32 — 35. 

III.  10.  The  ancients  regarded  the  ascription  of  one's  own  con- 
jectures and  opinions  to  God,  as  an  evidence  of  a  false  prophet ; 
and  as  inconsistent  with  the  dignity  of  a  true  prophet  and  messen- 
ger of  God.  Jer.  23:  16,  21,  25  etc. 

III.  11.      Acts   3:   18,21,   -Oiog—ngoitctzrjyyfde   {l\dXr}ai)  dice 


«5>  13 J  WRITINGS  OF  MOSES PROPHETIC.  157 

GTOfAatog  navTwv  rolv  (dyimv)  7iQoq)7]T(i)v  aviov  God — announced  be- 
forehand (spake,)  by  the  mouth  of  all  his  (holy)  prophets.  1  Pet. 
1:  10 — 12,  TO  iv  avrolg  {ngocfjrjTaLg)  nviuf,ta  Xqigtov  TTQOf.KxQTVQOn- 
svov  the  spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them  (the  prophets)  testified. 
2  Pet.  1:  21,  vno  nvev^azog  aylou  cf^QO^evot  ikahjoccv  ay  tot,  {>aov 
av&Qojnoi  holy  men  of  God  spake  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit;  comp.  Heb.  10:  15.  Matt.  1:  22.  22:  43.  Rom.  1:  2. 

III.  12.  Acts  2:  30  etc.  ngoqu^ifjg  vndgxffiv  because  (David) 
was  a  prophet  etc.;  compare  2  Pet.  1:  20,  21,  Tiaua  uQoqjtiTila 
ygccq,i^g,  Idiag  induaeMg  ov  yheica'  ov  yag  x.r.  A.  "  no  one  can  ren- 
der the  prophecies  of  Scripture  invalid,  (dissolvere,  irritum  red- 
dere,)  for  this  reason,  that  they  were  not  given  by  the  will  of  man, 
but  by  the  Holy  Spirit."  That  this  explanation  of  the  words  of 
Peter,  is  more  probable  than  the  common  one,  namely,  that  "  the 
prophecies  of  Scripture  cannot  be  interpreted  by  man,"  is  maintain- 
ed in  the  Dissertation  on  the  Catholic  Epistles,  and  on  the  follow- 
ing grounds:  1.  The  reason  assigned  in  v.  21,  would  not,  on  the 
latter  interpretation,  accord  with  the  assertion  of  v.  20  ;  for  it  does 
not  necessarily  follow,  that  a  prophecy  cannot  be  explained  iy 
men,  because  it  was  given  by  inspiration.  2.  It  is  not  true,  that  no 
prophecy  has  been  explained  by  man  until  after  its  completion.  3. 
To  supply  dv&goj7icot/ or  7igoq}7]i6)v  ^her  idlag,  would  be  a  harsh 
ellipsis.  These  words  are  therefore  better  explained  thus  :  "  Be 
assured,  that  no  prophecy  of  Scripture  can  be  frustrated  by  your 
opinions  or  ridicule,"  comp.  ch.  3:  2,  3  ;  idlag  stands  for  Idlag  vf^ojv, 
as  in  2  Pet.  3:  17.  1  Pet.  3:  1.  The  primary  signification  of 
inlXvGvg^  is  dissolutio  ;  and  the  meaning  explicatio,  is  only  a  de- 
duced one.  The  following  different  modifications^  of  this  interpre- 
tation have  been  advanced  :  1.  No  prophecy  can  be  explained  by 
the  prophets  themselves.^  2.  The  prophetic  writings  cannot,  like 
other  writings,  be  interpreted  by  the  unassisted  powers  of  the  rea- 
der,— the  aids  of  the  Spirit  are  necessary,  to  enable  us  to  under- 
stand the  instructions  of  the  Spirit.^  3.  No  prophecy  can  be  ex- 
plained by  itself,^  or  without  comparing  it  with  the  events. 

[Note.  In  addition  to  the  interpretations  of  this  text,  given  by 
our  author,  the  following  might  be  added,  some  of  which  are  per- 
haps not  without  plausibility. 

I.  No  prophecy  is  of  ar5^7r«ry  interpretation.    God  is  the  author 

1  Various  other  explanations  of  this  passage,  are  found  in  Pott,  Epist.  Cathol. 
Vol.  II.  p.  206  etc. 

2  Knapp,  Scripta  varii  argumenti,  p.  21. 

3  Stoltz,  Comment,  in  loc. 

4  Griesbach,  Comm.  in  loc.  2  Pet.  1:  16—21.  Pt.  II.  p.  4.  etc.  Morus'  Prae- 
Icct.  in  Jacobi  et.  Petri  epistolas,  p.  207.     Schott.  Novi  Testament!  vers.  Latin, 


I5d  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

of  the  prophecies ;  and  they  have  a  definite  meaning,  and  must  not 
be  distorted  into  conformity  with  our  peculiar  views — here  idiag 
refers  to  avBgwiKav. 

II.  No  prophecy  is  of  separate  detached  interpretation.  God  is 
the  author  of  all  the  prophecies  ;  and  hence  they  cannot  contradict 
each  other,  and  must  be  explained  accordantly. 

III.  All  the  prophecies  are  not  to  be  understood  according  to 
their  own  (literal)  meaning.  Some  of  them  had  a  proximate  com- 
pletion in  prior  events,  but  were  intended  by  God  their  author,  to 
refer  to  the  future  Messiah,  who  has  now  come. 

IV.  The  writings  of  the  prophets  are  not  of  their  (the  prophets') 
own  inspiration  (or  revelation,  propriae  patefactionis.)  The  proph- 
ets did  not  communicate  their  own  views,  but  the  counsels  of  God. 
Neither  of  the  three  first  versions,  nor  any  of  those  stated  by  our 
author,  seem  properly  to  accord  with  the  context.  This  last  in- 
terpretation therefore  appears  to  be  entitled  to  a  decided  preference, 
in  this  respect.  The  only  question  is,  whether  it  agrees  with  the 
usus  loquendi  of  the  word  inikvaig.  Its  radical  meaning  is  admitted 
to  be  dissolutiOf  solution ;  when  applied  to  things  unknown,  it  must 
mean,  to  remove  doubts  and  to  communicate  new  ideas  or  knowl- 
edge. When  applied  to  the  explanation  of  written  records,  (which, 
if  I  mistake  not,  it  rarely  is,)  it  must  signify  to  disclose  their  mean- 
ing. Now,  does  custom  confine  the  use  of  the  word  to  those  cases, 
in  which  the  removal  of  obscurity  and  the  communication  of  new 
ideas,  are  the  result  of  mere  natural  ability  ;  or  is  it  ever  applied  to 
cases,  in  which  the  person  giving  the  solution  is  aided  by  special  di- 
vine influence  ?  If  the  latter,  then  in  such  cases,  it  signifies  revela- 
tion ;  and  may  be  so  used  in  the  text  under  consideration.  Let  us 
now  examine  this  point.  Mark  uses  it  (4: 34)  to  signify  the  solu- 
tions which  our  Lord  gave  to  his  disciples,  in  private,  of  the  para- 
bles which  he  had  delivered  in  public.  The  LXX,  as  well  as 
Aquila,  use  it  in  Gen.  ch.  40,  to  express  the  explanation  given  by 
Joseph  of  the  dreams  of  the  butler  and  baker.  The  LXX  use  it  to 
translate  '^ns,  which,  according  to  Gesenius,  signifies  auslegen,  deu- 
ten  (von  traumen,)  to  explain,  to  interpret  (dreams.)  There  is 
a  somewhat  peculiar  use  of  the  word,  in  Symmachus'  version  of 
Hosea  3:  4,  where  it  is  used  for  fi'^Dnn,  by  which  Gesenius  under- 
stands "  a  kind  of  household  gods  or  pehates ;"  but  which  the  LXX 
translate  di^kojv,  and  Luther,  heiligthum  ;  the  Vulgate  and  English 
retain  the  original  word.  Among  these,  the  case  of  Joseph  is  di- 
rectly in  point.  When  Joseph  asked  the  king's  officers.  Wherefore 
look  ye  so  sadly  to  day  ?  they  answered,  We  have  dreamed  a  dream, 
and  there  is  no  interpreter  of  it ;  i.  e.  no  one  can  interpret  it.  And 
Joseph  said  unto  them,  "  Do  not  interpretations  belong  to  God  ? 
tell  rae  them."     Here  Joseph  himself  declares,  that  God  alone 


<5>  13.  ]         PROPHETIC  CHARACTER  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.         159 

could  impart  the  knowledge  they  wished.  And  from  all  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case,  no  one,  I  should  suppose,  who  believes  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Scriptures,  can  doubt  that  his  interpretation  was 
inspired — that  it  was  a  revelation.  The  usus  loquendi  will  therefore 
bear  us  out,  in  translating  inclvaecog  revelation  or  inspiration. — 
'Jdiag  would  then  refer  to  ngoqifjzcjv,  elliptically  suppressed ;  and 
the  version  would  harmonize  perfectly  with  the  whole  context,  thus : 
"  We  have  not»  believed  cunningly  devised  fables,  when  we  made 
known  to  you  the  coming  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  but  were  eye 
witnesses  of  his  majesty,  and  heard  the  testimony  of  God  the  Fath- 
er in  his  favour,  saying,  by  a  voice  from  heaven.  This  is  my  belov- 
ed Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased  ;  and  we  have  also  the  prophe- 
cies which  are  now  confirmed  (being  fulfilled  by  the  coming  of 
Jesus  Christ. — ^e^aioxagov;  see  Mark  16: 20.  1  Cor.  1:6.)  where- 
unto  ye  do  well  to  give  heed,  as  unto  a  light  shining  in  a  dark  place, 
until  the  day  dawn  dnd  the  day  star  arise  in  your  hearts  ;  knowing 
this  especially,  "that  the  writings  of  the  prophets,  contained  in  the 
Scriptures,  are  not  of  their  own  (the  prophets')  inspiration  ;  for  the 
prophecy  came  not,  in  old  time,  by  the  will  of  man,  but  holy  men 
of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost."     S.] 

III.  13.  See  Luke  24:  25— 27,— 44— -46.  22:  37.  Matt.  26: 
54.  Acts  2:  24 — 31.  The  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  must 
necessarily  be  fulfilled  in  Christ  I'deL  jeXfad^fjvai,  nXrjow'&tjvatf  and 
for  this  reason,  that  they  were  of  indisputable  certainty. 

III.  14.     The  moral  instructions  of  the  Old  Testament,  ac-- 
hnowledged  in  the  New. 

The  phrase  6  vo^og  ytal  ol  ngaqtitat  the  law  and  the  prophets,  in 
Matt.  5:  17 — 19,  signifies,  the  moral  precepts  of  the  Old  Testament ; 
just  as  in  some  other  passages,  (Luke  16:  6.  Matt.  11:  13,)  it 
designates  only  a  part  of  the  Old  Testament,  namely,  its  propheti- 
cal contents.  The  words  toyg  uv  napia  ytvrjiao  until  all  be  fulfilled 
(v.  18,)  cannot  denote  the  historical  parts  of  the  Old  Testament ; 
and  that  its  prophetic  parts  cannot  be  alluded  to,  is  evinced  by  the 
connexion  of  the  text  with  what  follows  it.  There  are  also  two 
other  passages  in  which  the  phrase  o  :^6fiog  nal  ol  nQOiftJTac  denotes 
the  moral  precepts  of  the  Old  Testament,  Matt.  7:  12.  22:40.^ 

III.  15.     The  narratives  of  the  Old  Testament  acknowledged  in 

the  New. 

The  following  passages  contain  narratives  taken  from  the  books 
of  Samuel,  Kings,  Joshua,  and  Judges :  Matt.  12:  3,  4,  42.  Luke 
4:25—27.  Rom.  11:  2— 4.  Acts  13:  20—22.  Heb.  11:  30—34. 


1  See  Dissert.  I,  in  libror.  Nov.  Testament,  historicorum  aliquot  locos,  p.  19, 20. 


160  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  1, 


III.  16.     The  inspiration  of  the  whole  Old  Testament  in  general, 
acknowledged  in  the  New, 

In  John  10:  34 — 36,  the  declaration  of  Jesus,  that  the  Scriptures 
must  not  be  invalidated,  refers  to  the  expression,  &tol  iazs  ye  are 
Gods, "  ye  admit  that  civil  officers  are  gods,  (in  that  sense  in  which 
the  Scriptures  declare  it),  and  because  the  Scriptures  say  so;  ought 
ye  not  therefore  to  believe  (v.  37, 38),  that  (in  the  sense  in  which  I 
have  asserted  it  in  v.  25,  29,  30)  I  am  the  Son  of  God,  or  one  who 
stands  in  the  most  intimate  union  with  him,  inasmuch  as  my  works 
(v.  37  etc.)  prove  me  to  be  a  much  greater  prophet  than  the  author 
of  the  82d  Psalm,  who  speaks  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  ?"  The 
context  leads  to  a  comparison  between  the  authority  of  the  older 
prophets  (and  particularly  the  author  of  the  82d  Psalm),  which  was 
such  as  to  render  their  declarations  obligatory,  and  the  authority  of 
the  highest  Messenger  of  God  (v.  36).  See  the  work  on  the  Ob- 
ject of  John,  p.  468  etc.  also  Roos'  Evidence  that  all  the  books  of 
the  Bible  are  inspired,  p.  74.  See  also  Matt.  8:  17,  compared 
with  <§>  8.  lllust.  4  of  this  work. 

The  following  texts  contain  examples  of  the  stress,  which  is  laid 
in  the  New  Testament,  on  particular  expressions  in  the  Old  :  1 
Cor.  15:  27.  Heb.  2:  7—9.  4:  4  (See  Storr's  Comment,  in  loc. 
Note  h),  and  v.  6' (Note  1),  v.  5,  6  (Note  1)  ch.  7:  17  (Note  y). 
Heb.  8:  13.  Matt.  1:22. 

III.  17.     The  truth  of  the   Old  Testament  acknowledged  as  in- 
disputable,  in  the  New, 

The  counterpart  or  opposite  of  truth,  is  that  which  can  be  over- 
turned dvfazai,  Xv-d^rivac,  (John  10:  35).  This,  Jesus  here  declares 
to  be  impossible,  in  reference  to  the  whole  Old  Testament ;  as  Pet. 
(1  ep.  1:  20)  declares  it,  relative  to  the  Old  Testament  prophe- 
cies. Kypke,  on  this  passage,  proves  that  Xvetv  signifies  irritum 
reddere,  by  an  induction  of  examples  from  profane  writers ;  and 
adds,  "  solvitur  verbum  Dei,  si  falsum  reprehenditur,"  the  word  of 
God  is  overturned,  if  it  is  found  to  be  untrue. 

Luke  16:  29 — 31,  e/ovac  Mwvaiu  aul  lovg  7igoq)?]Tccg'  ditovaaTto- 
accv  avTojv,  they  have  Moses  and  the  prophets  ;  let  them  hear  them. 
Acts  24:  14.  2  Tim.  3:  14,  15. 

III.  18.      The  divine  origin  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  ground  of 
its  claim  to  absolute  and  universal  credence. 

2  Tim.  3:  16,  naaa  ygacpt]  ^sonpsvavog,  xal  (acfiXifiog  the  whole 
Scripture  is  inspired  of  God,  and  is  profitable  etc.  Regarding 
&t6nv€voxog  as  a  predicate,  we  may  render  the  passage  thus :  "  the 


^  13.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  O.  T.  ACKNOWLEDGED  IN  N.  T.       161 

whole  Scripture,  i.  e.  the  whole  Old  Testament,  is  given  by  inspi- 
ration of  God."  In  this  sense  ygoKpri  is  used  without  the  article,  in 
2  Pet.  1:  20. — Or  we  may  render  it:  "all  the  Scriptures  (the 
whole  collection  of  the  Uqmv  ygui^fidimi/,  mentioned  in  v.  15),  i.  e. 
nil  the  several  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  are  given  by  inspiration 
of  God."  For,  as  the  books  of  the  O.  T.  are  denominated,  not  on- 
ly tj  yQa(ptj  the  Scripture,  but  sometimes  also  at  yfjacpal  the  Scrip- 
tures, in  the  plural,  (as  e.  g.  in  John  5:  39.  Matt.  21:  42.  26:  54, 
Rom.  15:  4.  1  Cor.  15:  3,  4) ;  so  the  singular,  v  yQ^^fn,  may  de- 
note a  particular  part  of  the  Old  Testament,  just  as  in  John  19:  27, 
it  denotes  a  particular  passage  of  the  Old  Testament.  Both  these 
modes  of  rendering,  give  this  as  the  sense  of  the  passage :  that 
the  whole  Old  Testament  is  insjnred  of  God.  But  if,  instead 
of  regarding  Oionvsvoxog  as  a  predicate,  we  view  it  as  the  subject 
and  translate  the  passage  thus  :  every  divinely  inspired  writing  is 
profitable  for  instruction  etc.  ;  still  Paul,  in  stating  this  general  prin- 
ciple, could  have  had  no  other  object  in  view,  than  to  confirm  the 
fact,  that  the  ligd  ygd^ifimu  (the  sacred  writings  mentioned  in  v.  15, 
which  Timothy  had  known  from  his  youth,^  i.  e.  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures of  the  Jews,  which  as  Krebs  and  Losner  have  proved  from 
Josephus  and  Philo,^were  known  by  the  appellation  ««pa  ypa'iUjuara), 
were  profitable  for  instruction  etc. ;  or,  as  it  is  expressed  in  v.  15, 
that  they  are  able  to  make  us  wise  (dwd^iva  aog)ioai,y^  in  regard 
to  the  salvation'*  which  is  attained  by  confidence^  in  Jesus.  Agree- 
ably to  the  latter  translation  also,  Paul  presupposes  that  the  itgd 
ygd/jfiaia  are  deoTiPSviJxa,  and  that  for  this  reason  they  are  able 
Goqlaai  sig  oMifjglav.^  As  to  the  word  'dsonvsvuiog,  we  may  ex- 
plain it,  either  by  recurring  to  the  -customary  phrase  nvevfia  &eov, 
and  thus  make  ygacp^  {^ionvevazog  to  signify  writings  which  were 
composed  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  Iv  Tivev^iatt  ■&sov.'^  So  in  Philo,^ 
the  expression  ^io'/^grioja  Xoyia^  signifies  Xoyia  iv  xg^n^^f^f? 'i^^ov  edita, 
divine  oracular  declarations.     Or  we  may  take  the  word  nvevaiog^ 

1  Acts  16:  6.  Comp.  2  Tim.  1:5. 

2  In  their  "  Observations  from  Philo  and  Josephus,"  on  this  passage. 

3  See  Tollner  On  the  divine  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  p.  220  etc. 
and  James  Capellus,  on  Tim.  3:  16. 

4  ^ojrrjQiav  Sid  niareojc,  for  aojrtjQiav  xijV  Sid  niorswg. 

5  Elg  oojrr]QLav—ah  in  reference  to,  quod  attinet  ad  ;  els  has  this  signification 
in  Eph.  3:  16.  Col.  4:  11.  2  Pet.  1:  8.  See  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis  nh'/^oj/uaj 
Note  28,  also  Vigcrus,  de  Idiotismis  linguae  Graecae,  edit.  Zeune,  p.  575,  where 
il  is  remarked  that  profane  authors  sometimes  use  it  instead  of  xara.  Comp. 
Schleusner's  Lex.  in  voc.  sig  no.  19. 

6  Comp.  Heinrich's  N.  Test.  Vol.  VII,  epp.  Pauli  ad  Tim.  Titum,  et  Philem. 
complectens  p.  173  etc. 

■7  See  2  Pet.  1:  21.  Morus,  Epitom.  Theol.  Christ,  ed.  2.  p.  31.  Heinrich,!. 
c.  p.  171 .  8  De  legatione,  p.  1022,  ed.  Francf. 

21 


162  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I, 

in  the  expression  -^sonvevoTog,  actively,  according  to  the  analogy 
of  anvevoiog  (one  who  does  not  breathe)  ;  and  then  dfonvevoTog 
must  be  translated,  "  spirans  Deum  (plenus  Deo),^^  and  will  de- 
note writings  which  are  full  of  divinity,  from  which  the  deity 
breathes  forth.  Kypke^  remarks,  "  id  spirare  aliquis  dicitur,  quo 
plenus  est  et  quasi  turget,  a  person  is  said  to  breathe  that,  of  which 
he  is  full,  and  by  which  he  is  as  it  were  swelled  up.'* 

Agreeably  to  both  the  foregoing  explanations,  Paul  attributes  to 
God,  a  participation  in  the  production  of  the  Sacred  Writings  of  the 
Jews.  The  nature  of  this  participation  is  determined  by  the  con- 
text. Paul  had  just  been  warning  Timothy,  that  even  if  others  did 
deviate  from  the  truth,  {nXavoji/ieg  xat  nXavw^iefioi  v.  13),  yet  he 
ought  to  adhere  {^iveivY  to  that  which  he  had  been  taught,  and  of 
the  truth  of  which  he  had  been  convinced,  I'^ud^s  xal  eniox(adri^  v. 
14.  In  V.  14,  15,  Paul  adduces  two  reasons,  on  which  Timothy's 
conviction  of  the  truth  of  those  christian  doctrines  which  he  had 
learned  of  Paul,  was  grounded.  "  Adhere  strenuously  to  that  which 
thou  hast  learned,  and  of  the  truth  of  which  thou  hast  become  con- 
vinced, because  thou  knowest  from  whom  thou  hast  learned  it, 
ildojg  TiaQa  xii'og  tf^aOeg;  and  because  from  thy  childhood  thou  hast 
been  acquainted  with  the  Holy  Scriptures  (of  the  Old  Testament), 
or*  (xTio  (iQtcpovg  tcc  hga  ygocf^ifiara  oidag.""^  The  first  reason  of 
Timothy's  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  doctrines  taught  him  by 
Paul,  is  therefore  founded  on  the  person  of  Paul,  his  teacher  (2 
Tim.  1:  13)  ;  that  is,  in  the  divine  authority  of  the  apostle  (^  10), 
of  which  Timothy  had  every  possible  opportunity  to  be  convinced,  as 
he,  having  been  the  confidant  of  this  apostle  (2  Tim.  3:  10),  must 
have  had  the  very  best  advantages  for  knowing  perfectly  the  char- 
acter and  miracles  of  Paul ;  and  he  must  have  been  fully  convinc- 
ed, that  nothing  could  be  more  inconsistent  with  the  character  of 
this  apostle,  than  to  suppose  that   he  could,  either  designedly  or 

i  Kypke  in  Acta  Apost.  9:  1. 

2  Mtvetv  (iv  /Jyat)  to  adhere  tn,  to  observe  a  doctrine;  comp.  John  8:  31, 
fiiveiv  tv  Xoyatj  with  v.  51,  TTjQtlv  rbv  Xoyov.  See  also  Kypke  on  John  8:  31,  and 
the  passages  which  Krebs  and  Losner  adduce  from  Joseph  us,  in  their  remarks 
on  Gal.  3:  10,  where  ^fifievatv  has  this  signification.  Particularly  the  following 
passage^  from  Josephus  contr.  Apionem.  L.  I.  §  8,  belongs  here,  "naat  Gv/icpvrov 
iOTiv  ev&ug  ix  T?jg  TTQOJZTjg  ysvioeojg  ^lovSaioigj  to  vofttsiv  avrd  (zd  yQaju/nara 
rjfiojv)  ■&SOV  Soy/Ltara,  xal  rovTOcg  i^fiiveiv^  the  Jews  all  have  an  innate  propen- 
sity, immediately  from  their  infancy,  to  regard  our  Scriptures  as  the  doctrines 
of  God,  and  to  adhere  to  them. 

3  Hiarovad'at-  to  acquire  a  firm  conviction  of  a  matter.  See  Scultet'sand  Los- 
ner's  Note  on  this  passage. 

4, The  first  reason  is  indicated  by  the  participle  eidojg i  the  second  is  expressed 
by  OTt.  A  similar  transition  from  one  mode  of  construction  to  another,  is  found 
in  other  passages  ;^e.  g.  John  2:  24,  25,  Std  To—aal  oxi.  Acts  14:  22,  Ttaqayia- 
XovvTsg  ififi6vetv  ttJ  Ttiaru^  xal  on.  Heb.  2: 17,  %'a—yiv7]raL—tig  to  cidGxeadvt, 
Compare  also  Luke  3:  21.  1  Cor.  7:  26. 


^  13.]    DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OP  O.  T.  ACKNOWLEDGED  IN  N.  T.       163 

from  misapprehension,  arrogate  to  himself  the  authority  of  a  divine 
messenger,  when  it  did  not  belong  to  him.  The  second  ground  of 
Timothy's  conviction  of  the  truth  of  Paul's  doctrine,  (that  we  can 
be  saved  only  by  reliance  on  the  merits  of  Jesus),  was  his  intimate 
acquaintance  with  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Jews.  These  Scrip- 
tures, the  apostle  declares,  were  able  aoqiiGai,,  to  afford  to  Timothy, 
(and  through  him  as  a  teacher,  to  others  also),  a  salutary  conviction 
of  the  truth  of  that  christian  doctrine.  But  these  two  different 
grounds  of  conviction,  (the  one  derived  from  the  divine  authority  of 
Paul,  and  the  other  from  an  acquaintance  with  the  Old  Testament), 
by  which  Timothy  was  urged  to  adhere  to  the  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity, could  not  have  been  thus  combined  together  by  Paul,  if  he 
had  not  believed  the  Old  Test,  to  possess  a  divine  authority,  as 
well  as  himself.  If  we  suppose  that  Paul  had  advanced,  if  not  pub- 
licly, yet  among  his  confidential  friends,  the  opinion  that  the  sacred 
writings  of  the  Jews  were  by  no  means  possessed  of  divine  authori- 
ty ;  or  if  we  suppose  that  he  had  declared,  contrary  to  the  opinion 
of  the  Jews,  that  a  part  only  of  these  writings  were  of  divine  au- 
thority ;  how  could  he,  when  exhorting  Timothy  to  adhere  to  his 
doctrines,  urge  the  accordance  of  the  Old  Testament  with  them,  as 
a  prior  {ano  ^gtcpovg)  argument  in  favour  of  their  truth,  or  as  af- 
fording evidence  distinct  from  his  own  divine  authority  and  inde- 
pendent of  it?  Timothy  was  the  very  individual  whose  intimacy 
with  Paul,  rendered  him  best  acquainted  with  the  private  sentiments 
of  that  apostle  ;  he  must  therefore  have  certainly  known  the  fact, 
if  Paul  did  not  approve  of  that  high  veneration  for  the  sacred  books 
of  the  Jews,  which  he  had  imbibed  in  his  youth ;  he  must  have 
known,  that  Paul  regarded  as  authoritative,  only  those  particular 
parts  of  these  writings  which  he  designated  by  virtue  of  his  apostol- 
ical authority  ;  and  that  to  these  parts  such  authority  belonged,  not 
because  they  were  contained  in  the  reputed  sacred  books  of  the 
Jews,  but  because  an  apostle  had  given  to  them  his  sanction.  Tim- 
othy must  have  known,  that  Paul  himself  did  not  regard  his  second 
argument  for  adherence  to  his  doctrines,  as  satisfactory,  and  as  dis- 
tinct from  his  own  apostolical  authority. 

Now,  whether  God  revealed  unknown  truths  to  the  writers  of  the 
Old  Testament,  or  whether  he  superintended  and  guided  them 
while  writing  (<§>  II),  or  whether  he  sanctioned  their  writings  by  a 
subsequent  divine  messenger  (<§>  12);  it  is  certain  from  the  declara- 
tions of  the  apostle  Paul,  that  those  books  are  in  such  a  sense  in- 
spired and  given  by  God,  that  they  are  to  be  regarded  as  of  divine 
authority  ;  and  for  this  reason  they  are  entitled  to  credence.  And 
this  is  the  precise  idea  of  divine  inspiration,  which,  in  the  days  of 
Timothy,  was  instilled  into  the  minds  of  all  the  Jews  from  their 
earliest  infancy.     For,  agreeably  to  the  testimony  of  Josephus  above 


164  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I, 


referred  to,  the  Jews  were  taught  from  tlieir  childhood,  to  regard 
their  (twenty  two)  sacred  books  as  containing  divine  instructions. 
According  to  this  same  historian,  they  regarded  no  other  books  as 
worthy  of  equal  respect.  The  reason  which  Josephus  himself  as- 
signs, is,  that  the  other  books  (the  apocryphal),  which  were  not 
found  in  the  Jewish  canon,  have  not  the  support  of  a  certain  and 
uninterrupted  succession  of  prophets  ;  or,  that  it  cannot  be  proved, 
that  there  was  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  prophets  down  to  the 
times  in  which  the  apocryphal  books  were  written.  Because  a  book 
which  lays  claim  to  so  high  a  degree  of  credibility,  ought  necessari- 
ly, to  be  written  by  a  prophet,  that  is,  to  be  written  under  a  divine 
influence,  and  thus  become  possessed  of  divine  authority,  or  contain 
the  doyiAaxa  '&eov. 

In  reference  to  the  various  uses  of  the  Old  Testament,  which 
Paul  mentions  (2  Tim.  3:  16,  17),  it  should  be  recollected,  that 
Paul  does  not  here  require  of  every  private  Christian,  but  only  of 
every  teacher  who  wishes  faithfully  to  discharge  the  duties  of  his 
profession  (rtw  rov  dsov  dvdgojTCM),  that  he  be  fully  acquainted  with 
all  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  be  qualified  to  apply  them 
to  the  confirmation  of  the  apostles'  doctrine,  that  dependance  on  the 
merits  of  Jesus  is  the  condition  of  our  salvation.  And  certainly,  the 
more  intimately  a  christian  teacher  was  acquainted  with  the  Old 
Testament,  the  better  was  he  able,  on  the  one  hand,  to  convince 
the  more  enhghtened  Jews  of  the  truth  of  Christianity,^  and  on  the 
other,  to  defend  the  christian  doctrines  against  contumacious  Jews.^ 
Both  SidaaxaXia  and  iXeyxog  (instruction  and  refutation  of  oppo- 
nents) were,  in  the  time  of  Timothy,  principal  duties  of  a  christian 
teacher.  But  in  general,  familiarity  with  the  Old  Testament  tends 
to  produce  a  thorough  comprehension  and  firm  conviction  of  the 
truth  of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles.  And  even  at  the 
present  day,  our  faith  in  Jesus,  and  our  conviction  of  the  divine 
mission  of  the  apostles,  may  be  confirmed  and  established  by  the 
writings  of  the  Old  Testament ;  and  this,  notwithstanding  our  belief 
in  the  divine  authority  of  the  Old  Testament,  is  grounded  principal- 
ly on  our  conviction  of  the  divine  authority  of  Jesus  and  his  apos- 
tles. For  it  must  ever  appear  to  the  Christian  very  remarkable, 
that  the  writings  of  the  Old  Covenant,  which  were  composed  long 
prior  to  the  age  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  and  which  were  receiv- 
ed as  divine  books  by  the  Jews',  the  greater  part  of  whom  were  en- 
emies of  Christianity  ;  should  contain  histories,  instructions,  and 
statutes  which  have  a  manifest  and  remarkably  striking  connexion 
with  the  more  recent  history  and  doctrines  of  Jesus,  and  had  a  spe- 
cific reference  to  them  long  before  they  were  in  existence.     The 


1  Acts  17:  11.  .      ,  2  Acts  28:  28.  Tit.  1:  10  etc. 


"^  14.]    DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  O.  T.  ACKNOWLEDGED  IN  N.  T.       165 

doctrine  of  the  person  and  destination  of  Christ,  is  not  the  only  one 
which  admits  of  striking  illustration  from  the  Old  Testament ;  on 
many  other  doctrines  of  Christianity  much  light  is  thrown.  Nay, 
the  New  Testament  presupposes  some  doctrines  to  have  been  learn- 
ed from  the  Old  Testament,  and  therefore  rather  alludes  to  them 
than  explains  them.  Especially  does  the  Old  Testament  present 
to  us,  a  grand  drama  of  divine  providence,  in  the  history  of  the 
Jewish  nation,  which  is  related  from  its  commencement,  and  contin- 
ued through  a  long  series  of  years.  Here,  by  express  declarations 
of  the  prophets  concerning  the  designs  of  God  in  particular  events, 
and  by  the  striking  examples  of  a  divine  superintendence  and  gov- 
ernment, the  participation  of  God  in  the  welfare  and  transactions  of 
man,  is  displayed.^  In  this  manner  the  Old  Testament,  by  various 
instructions,  {didaaxccliojv  v.  16),  strengthens  faith  in  Jesus  and  his 
doctrines.  So  also  it  tends  to  {tnavoQ&ojaiv  v.  16)  induce  us  to  lay 
aside  those  sins  which  are  inconsistent  with  faith  in  Jesus  Christ, 
and  to  (naidelav  zr}i>  h  dtxatoavprj)  produce  a  practical  reformation 
accordant  with  this  faith.  This  it  does,  partly  by  its  precepts  and 
exhortations  of  various  kinds,  and  partly  by  proposing  examples  and 
holding  forth  the  divine  approbation  or  displeasure.^ 


SECTION    XIV. 


Integrity  of  the    Old  Testament. 

The  inquiry  what  were  the  particular  books  known  in  the  time 
of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  and  denominated  <f pa /p«^iMaz«  (1,)  or 
0  pofiog  xul  olnQoq.>r}Tat,^  or  simply  6  vofiog  (2,)  or  tJ  yoaqjr]  (3,)  and 
which  were  sanctioned  by  our  Saviour  and  his  apostles,  as  writings 
of  divine  authority  ;  must  be  determined  principally  (4)  from  the 
testimony  of  the  New  Testament.  For,  in  addition  to  the  books  of 
Moses  (5,)  which  the  New  Testament  expressly  mentions  and  de- 
clares to  be  of  divine  authority,  (*§>  13,)  as  appears  from  the  ex- 
pression 0  voiKQi;  aal  ol  ngocfj^iat'  the  New  Testament  also  specifies 
the  following  books,  as  belonging  to  the  sacred  canon  of  the  Jews. 

The  book  of  Joshua  and  that  of  Judges j  Heb.  1 1 :  30 — 34  (com- 

1  Vide  Hess'  Bibliothek  der  Heiligen  Geschichte,  Th.  II.  S.  17  ff. 
3  1  Cor.  10:  5—11.  Heb.  3:  15—4:  11. 


166        THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  THE  ANCIENT  JEWISH  CANON.       [bk.  I, 

pared  with  Josh.  6:  2.  Judg.  6;  4,  11,  14,  15.)  Acts  13:  20,  f^sid 
zavTa — tdca^e    x()*ra?(6). 

The  books  of  Samuel,  Matt.  12:  3  etc.  comp.  1  Sam.  ch.  21. 
Heb.  1:  5.  comp.  2  Sam.  7:  14.(7) 

The  books  of  ^1/1^5,  Rom.  11:  2.  comp.  1  K.  ch.  19.(8)  ' 

Daniel,  Matt.  24:  15.  comp.  Dan.  9:  27.  Heb.  11:  33,  34. 
comp.  Dan.  6:  3. 

Job,  1  Cor.  3:  19.  comp.  Job  5:  13.(9) 

Isaiah,  Luke  4:  16  etc.  comp.  Is.  61:  1.  58:  6.  Acts  8:  30—35. 
comp.  Is.  ch.  53.  John  6:  45.  compare  Is.  54:  13.  John  12.  41. 
comp.  Is.  6:  10.  1  Cor.  14:  21.  comp.  Is.  28:  11.  Rom.  3:  15 
—  19.  comp.  Is.  59:7,  8.  Rom.  10:  11—21.  comp.  Is.  28:  16. 
52:  7.  53:  1.  65:  1,  2.  1  Pet.  2:  6.  comp.  Is.  28:  16. 

Jeremiah,  Heb.  10:  15.  compare  Jer.  31:  33  etc. 

Hosea,  Rom.  9:  25.  comp.  Hos.  2:  25. 

Joel,  Acts  2:  16.  comp.  Joel  3:  1  etc. 

Amos,  Acts  7:  42.  comp.  Amos  5:  25,  Acts  15:  15.  comp. 
Amos  9:  11. 

Jonah,  Matt.  12:  39—41.  comp.  Jonah  2:  1. 

Micah,  John  7:  42.  and  Matt.  2:  5.  comp.  Micah  5:  1. 

HabakJcuJc,  Acts  13:  40.  comp.  Hab.  1:  5. 

Zechariah,  Matt.  21:  4.  compare  Zech.  9:  9.  John  19:  37. 
comp.  Zech.  12:  10. 

Malachi,  Mark  1:  2.  comp.  Mai.  3:  1. 

The  book  of  Psalms,  Luke  20:  42,  Aa^ldXiyev  Iv  ^t^Xco  ipaXfioHv^ 
Acts  1:  20.  ytygccTiTat  iv  pi^Xco  ipaX/ncot^Maitt.  21:  42.  (comp.  Ps. 
118:  22,)  iv  Tcc7g  ygacpaig.  In  Luke  24:  44,  they  are  called  xpuXfioi, 
and  in  v.  45,  are  included  among  the  ygacpag,  John  13:  18.  (comp. 
Ps.  41:  10,)  ivanXriQiaOri  ^  yQaqj^.  Rom.  3:  10—14.  comp.  Ps. 
14:  1.  5:  10.  140:  4.  10:  7.  Rom.  3:  18, 19.  comp.  Ps.  36:  2. 
107:  42. 

Proverbs  of  Solomon,  James  4:  6.  comp.  Prov.  3:  34.(10) 

To  these  books,  which  are  expressly  named  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, may  be  added  Ezekiel,  and  the  four  minor  prophets,  which 
are  not  above  mentioned ;  because  it  was  customary,  before  the 
time  of  Jesus,  to  class(ll)  Ezekiel,  Isaiah,  and  Jeremiah,  together, 
under  the  appellation  of  The  book  of  the  Prophets  (^i^log  twv 
nQo<pfjiMv',)  as  well  as  to  count  twelve  minor  prophets.{12) 


§  14.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OP  THE 'OLD   TESTAMENT.  167 

And  that  tlie  other  books,  which  are  not  named  above,  but  which 
are,  by  Jews  and  Christians,  received  into  the  canon  of  the  Old 
Testament,  were  also  admitted  into  the  collection  of  Jewish  sacred 
writings,  at  the  time  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  ;  is  proved  by  the 
testimony  of  Josephus,  their  cotemporary.  For,  in  his  first  book 
against  Appion,  (<§>  8)  (13,)  he  states,  that  all  the  Jews(14)  re- 
ceived twenty  two  books  as  sacred  and  of  divine  origin  ;  and  he 
also  divides  them,  as  Luke  does  (24:  44,)  into  three  principal 
classes.  Now,  if  we  attempt  to  make  up  the  number  of  books 
given  us  by  Josephus,  we  shall  find  that,  according  to  the  old  Jew- 
ish method  of  calculating,(15)  besides  those  above  mentioned,  there 
are  required  exactly  as  many  more  as  are  now  received  by  the  Jews 
into  their  canon.  And  Josephus  himself,  in  other  passages,  speci- 
fies the  greater  part  of  these  additional  books(16)  as  being  such  as 
were  at  that  time  received  among  the  Sacred  Writings,(ll) 

Finally,  it  is  evident  from  the  substantial  accordance  of  the 
passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  quoted  in  the  New  Testament  or 
in  Josephus  or  Philo,  with  our  present  text,  that  the  writings  of  the 
Old  Testament,  with  which  Jesus  and  his  apostles  were  acquainted, 
and  which  they  confirmed  as  divine,  were  in  the  same  state  in  which 
they  now  are,  and  that  they  have  not  suffered  any  material  altera- 
tion since  that  time.  Moreover,  the  very  same  arguments,  by  which 
the  integrity  of  the  New  Testament  was  established  {'^  4,)  are  also 
applicable  to  the  Old  Testament,  and  satisfactorily  establish  its  in- 
tegrity. (18) 

III.  1.      The  signification   ofUgoi  ygafifiara — 6  vofAog  ical  oi 

Tigoq-riTui. 

The  writings  of  the  Old  Testament  are  termed  Uga  yga^^uTa 
sacred  writings,  in  2  Tim.  3:  15  :  and  6  vofiog  aal  ol  n g o (f  rj i a i.  the 
law  and  the  prophets,  in  Acts  24:  14.  Luke  16:  29,  31.  Matt.  5: 
17.  comp.  also  Acts  28:  23.  13:  15.  Rom.  3:  21.  Matt.  7:  12. 
22:  40.  In  a  Dissertation  on  the  most  ancient  division  of  the 
writings  of  the  Old  Covenant,  the  author  of  this  work  remarks  : 
*'  Josephus^  uses  the  expression  6  vofiog  xal  ol  ngocprjtai,,  and  im- 
mediately after,  quotes  a  passage  from  the  Psalms  (34:  20,)  and 
another  from  the  book  of  Proverbs  (3:  18,)  both  of  which  belong  to 

1  De  Maccabaeis,  c.  18. 


168     SETTLEMENT  OF  THE  CANON  OF  OLD  TESTAMENT.    £bK.  I. 

the  third  class,  the  Hagiographa.  This  mode  of  expression  may 
have  been  an  ellipsis,  for  o  vofiog  nul  ol  ngoqt^Tai^,  xal  zd  Xoi^nci  rcov 
fti(3ko}v;  for  the  latter  expression  (id  koind  etc.)  was  commonly  used 
to  designate  the  third  class  of  books  or  the  Hagiographa.  This 
form  of  expression,  however,  may  have  originated  from  the  fact, 
that  the  writers  of  all  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  ex- 
cept those  of  Moses,  were  termed  nQocf^ritav,  in  the  more  extended 
sense  of  the  word.  It  is  evident  that  Peter  used  the  word  7iQoq)r]zui 
prophets,  in  this  sense,  in  Acts  3:  24,  where  he  certainly  did  not  ex- 
clude from  among  the  n^oq:'i^Taig,  ol  iXaXriaav  xal  itari^yyedccv  idg 
i^fiigag  Tuvvag  (who  foretold  the  time  of  Christ,)  the  author  of  the 
Psalms,  from  whom  he  himself  quotes  a  prophecy  concerning  Christ, 
Acts  2:  30. 

Taken  in  a  still  greater  latitude,  the  expression  ol  ngoqjfjiai  in- 
cludes also  Moses  himself  and  the  Mosaic  writings  ;  it  embraces  the 
whole  Old  Testament.  Thus  it  is  used  in  Acts  3:  18,  21,  imme- 
diately after  which,  Moses  is  mentioned  (v.  22,)  and  in  v.  24, 
ol  nQoq:rJTac  ano  2^af.iovi^X  aai  imv  yad^f^rjg  the  prophets  from 
Samuel  and  afterwards.  Thus  too,  in  Matt.  26:  56.  Luke  18:  31. 
24:  25,  by  ngocffjiacg  we  must  understand  the  whole  collection  of 
sacred  writings  so  far  as  they  contained  prophecies. 

III.  2.     The  word  v  6  fi  o  g  or  law. 

This  word  is  used,  by  synecdoche,  for  the  whole  Old  Testament, 
in  Matt.  5:  18.  Luke  16:  17.  John  10:  34  (where  the  6th  verse  of 
the  82d  Psalm  is  quoted  as  a  passage  from  the  vo^wg.)  Rom.  3:  19. 
where  the  phrase  oaa  6  vofxog  Xtytv  as  the  lawsaith,  refers  to  several 
passages  quoted  from  the  Psalms  (v.  11 — 18.) 

III.  3. — F q  a  cp  r]  or  scripture. 

In  John  10  :  35,  ygacprj  denotes  the  collection  of  books  which  is 
termed  vofAog,  in  the  34th  verse. 

III.  4.     The  canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  determined  princi- 
pally  by  the  New  Testament. 

All  those  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  are  of  any  consider- 
able use  in  the  proof  of  the  christian  doctrines,  and  many  others  also, 
are  specifically  named  in  the  New  Testament,  and  classed  among 
the  holy  Scriptures.  Moreover,  in  the  determination  of  the  ques- 
tion, what  books  were  contained  in  the  Jewish  canon,  the  testimony 
of  the  antilegomena  of  the  New  Testament,  is  as  satisfactory  evi- 
dence as  that  of  the  homoJogoumeoa,  even  to  those  who  are  not 
convinced  of  the  genuineness  of  the  former.  For,  let  the  authors 
have  been  who  they  may,  they  must  have  lived  in  the  age  of  the 


^  14.]  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  169 

apostles,  or  immediately  after;  and  consequently  were  as  well 
qualified  to  bear  testimony  relative  to  the  particular  books,  which 
were  then  received  into  the  Jewish  canon,  as  the  authors  of  the 
homologoumena,  or  Philo,  or  Josephus. 

Ill,  5.  The  books  of  Moses,  of  which  Josephus^  also  mentions 
five,  are  all  of  them  quoted  in  the  New  Testament. 

Genesis,  or  the  first  book  of  Moses,  is  quoted,  Rom.  4:  3,  17  etc. 
see  Gen.  15:  6,  5,  and  17:  5.  Gal.  3^  8.  see  Gen.  12:  3.  Gal,  4: 
21  etc.  see  Gen.  21:  2,  9,  comp.  with  16:  15. 

Exodus  or  the  second — Ex.  3:  6  is  quoted  in  Mark  12:  26.  and 
Ex.  33:  19.  9:  16,  in  Rom.  9:  15,  17. 

Leviticus^  or  the  third — Lev.  12:  8  is  quoted  in  Luke  2:  24. 
and  Lev.  18:  5,  in  Rom.  10:  5. 

Numbers,  or  the  fourth — Num.  21:  8,  9  is  quoted  in  John  3:  14. 
and  Num.  25:  1,  9.  21:  4  etc.   14:  2,  36,  in  1  Cor.  10:  8—11. 

Deuteronomy,  or  the  fifth  book  of  Moses — Deut.  24:  1  is  quoted 
in  Matt.  19:  7.  and  Deut.  25:  5,  in  Matt.  22:  24.  and  Deut.  18: 
5,  in  Acts  3:  22.  and  Deut.  32:  21,  in  Rom.  10:  19. 

Eichhorn,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,^  remarks, 
that  Philo  quotes  all  the  five  books,  and  in  terms  of  the  highest  re- 
spect.^ 

III.  6.     Joshua  and  Judges. 

In  the  first  passage  mentioned  in  the  text,  and  to  which  this 
Illustration  refers,  some  narratives  are  adduced  from  the  books  of 
Joshua  and  Judges,  in  connexion  with  other  narratives  from  the 
Old  Testament.  It  is  only  after  the  second  clause  of  the  35th 
verse,  that  examples  are  adduced,  which  are  not  contained  in  the 
canonical  books.*  The  reader  may  compare  with  this  text,  ch.  46: 
1 — 15  of  the  book  of  Sirach  or  Ecclesiasticus.  Josephus  expressly 
classes  the  book  of  Joshua  among  the  sacred  writings  ;^  and  he 

1  Contra  Apionem,  Lib.  1   §  8.  2  Part  I.  p. 89.  2d  ed. 

3  On  the  genuineness  of  the  Pentateach,  on  the  various  conjectures  and  ob- 
jections which  have  been  made  in  reference  to  the  time  and  the  manner  of  its 
composition,  the  reader  may  consult  Eichhorn's  Introd.to  the  O.T.  Pt.  II.  §  405 
— 415.  Jahn's  Introd.  to  O.  T.  Pt.  II.  Sect.  1,  Viennn,  1803.  p.  15—95.  also 
Griesinger  on  the  Pentateuch,  Stuttgard,  1806,  p.  31 — 43.  Tubing,  gel.  Anzeig. 
for  1806,  No.  85.  p.  675—688.  Critique  on  Vater's  liypothesis  relative  to  the 
Pentateuch,  proposed  in  his  Commentary.  The  same  work  for  1808.  No,  38.  p, 
304,  306  etc.  De  Wette's  Critical  Essay  on  the  credibility  of  the  books  of  Chron- 
icles in  reference  to  the  Mosaic  history  and  legislation.  '  Weber's  History  of  the 
art  of  writing,  Gottingen,  1807,  No.  I,  II.  On  the  literature  of  this  investigation, 
see  Augusti's  Sketch  of  a  historico-critical  Introd.  to  the  Old  Testament,  Jena, 
1806.  p.  128  etc. 

4  Storr,  on  Heb.  11:  35,  note  k.  5  Antiq.  Lib,  V.  ch.  1.  §  17. 

22 


170  JOSHUA JUDGES SAMUEL.  [bK.  I. 


makes  much  use  of  the  book  g(  Judges,  in  the  5th  book  of  his  Jew- 
ish Antiquities.! 

III.  T.     The  hooks  of  Samuel. 

In  Matt.  12:  3,  4,  the  passage  quoted  from  the  first  book  of 
Samuel,  is  placed  in  connexion  with  another,  quoted  (v.  5)  from 
Num.  28:  9,  10.  In  Heb.  1:  5,  a  passage  from  Psalm  2:  7,  is  pla- 
ced in  immediate  connexion  with  one  from  2  Sam.  7:  14.  The 
book  of  Sirach  (46:  16—47)  contains  narratives  from  both  books  of 
Samuel.  Philo  quotes  the  first  book  of  Samuel  by  its  customary 
name  among  the  Greek  Jews,  viz.  first  book  of  kings,  and  uses  the 
phrase  (ug  6  uQog  Xoyog  (frjai;'^  and  Josephus  frequently  quotes  both 
the  books  of  Samuel,  in  his  Jewish  Antiquities,  books  V — VII. 

III.  8.     TJie  book  of  Kings. 

Tlie  second  book  of  Kings  is  quoted,  in  connexion  with  the  first 
(which  Paul  in  the  passage  cited  reckons  among  the  y^ciq)^,)  in 
Luke  4:  25 — 27  ;  the  second  book  (5:  14)  is  quoted  in  the  27th 
verse  ;  and  the  first  (ch.  17:  1,  9.  18:  44,)  in  verses  25  and  26. — 
Josephus^  designates  the  books  of  the  kings  and  the  book  of  Gene- 
sis, by  the  name  of  hgoi  ^I'^loi  sacred  books. 

III.  9.     The  books  of  Job  and  Danieh 

The  books  of  Psalms  and  Job  are,  in  1  Cor.  3:  19,  20,  quoted  in 
the  same  manner,  and  placed  in  connexion  with  each  other.  In 
Matt.  ch.  24,  reference  is  had  to  the  second  or  prophetic  part  of 
Daniel ;  and  the  first  or  historical  part  is  quoted  in  Heb.  11:  33,  34, 
where  Paul  draws  all  his  examples  from  books  which  belonged  to 
the  sacred  canon  of  the  Jews  :  the  wovds  tq.Qalav  aia^iaTa  ?,66vta)p^ 
ea^eaav  dui/aiAtvnvQog  ihey  stopped  the  mouths  of  lions,  and  quench- 
ed the  flames  of  fire,  allude  to  Dan.  6:  22.  3:  15  etc. :  afterward, 
in  the  beginning  of  the  35th  verse,  the  words  tXa^ov — avroHv  con- 
tain an  incident  quoted  from  2  Kings  (4:  21,)  a  canonical  book  of 
the  Old  Testament.  Josephus  also  found  both  the  historical  and 
the  prophetic  parts  of  Daniel  in  his  copy  of  the  sacred  books  of  the 
Jews,  among  which  he  expressly  classed  the  book  of  Daniel.^  In 
ch.  10  *5>  4,  he  says  expressly,  lo  ^i^liov  ylavtr'jXov,  ev^rjoei  xut 
Tovio  h  zo7g  u^o7g  ygdfjftuaiv  the  book  of  Daniel  he  will  also  find 
among  the  sacred  writings.     And  it  was  the  historical  part  of  Dan- 


1  See  Eicbborn's  Introd.  Pt,  1.  p.  115  etc. 

S  De  Temulentla,  opp.  T.  I.  p.  379,  ed.  Mangey. 

3  Antiq.  Lib.  IX.  cap.  2.  §  2.  4  Ant.  Jud.  Lib.  X.  cap.  10.  i: 


1 


^   14.]  PROVERBS THE  PROPHETS.  171 

iel  which  led  the  ancient  Jews  to  class  the  book  with  the  historical 
or  first  part  of  (uop  ngQCftjTwv)  the  prophetic  writings. 

In  his  dissertation  On  the  most  ancient  division  of  the  books  of 
the  Old  Covenant,  the  author  of  this  work  has  remarked :  "  We  fre- 
cfuently  find  the  book  of  Daniel  classed  with  the  writings  of  the 
prophets,  strictly  so  called ;  but  in  the  most  ancient  times,  the  char- 
acter of  a  book  was  determined  by  its  first  chapters,  and  according- 
ly this  was  placed  in  the  second  class  or  the  prophets.  This  ex- 
plains the  reason  wliich  mduced  Sirach  (48:  22-— 29,  10)  to  omit 
Daniel  in  his  enumeration  of  ihe  prophets. 

III.  10.     Proverbs  of  Solomori. 

Josephus  citing  passages  from  the  sacred  writings  (ix  xov  vofiov 
3ta?  Tcov  T[Qoq)f]Ta)v) ,  quotes  among  others^  a  passage  from  the  Pro- 
verbs of  Solomon  (ch.  3;  18).^ 

.  III.  11.     Oi  UgotpfJT at — the  Prophets. 

In  his  dissertation,  already  cited,  On  the  most  ancient  division  of 
tbe  books  of  the  Old  Covenant,^  the  author  of  this  work  remarks  : 
**  To  the  second  class  of  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  are  termed  at  ngo^ffjtat^  in  the  more  strict  sense  of  the  term 
(Illust.  1),  belonged  to  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which,  together  with  the  book  of  Joshua,  were  immediately  attached 
to  the  Pentateuch  ;  and  also  the  strictly  prophetic  books,  ol  7TQoq>fj- 
zav  the  prophets,  in  the  most  limited  sense.  The  latter  seem  to  be 
referred  to  in  Acts  13:  40,  to  eiQrjfAtvov  Iv  roTg  -nQoapt'iTaK;  that  which 
was  declared  by  the  prophets,  and  in  Acts  7:  42,  ^l^Xog  xmv  ngo- 
<f)rjtwp  book  of  the  prophets;  compare  also  John  6:  45.  And  this 
collection  of  strictly  prophetic  books,  again,  was  subdivided  into  two 
parts,  the  one  embracing  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel,  (which  are 
enumerated  in  the  book  of  Sirach,  ch.  48:  22.  49:  6,  8),  and  the 
other  including  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  ol  dmdsaa  Trgoq)fjvM." 

III.  12.     The  Twelve  Prophets. 

The  appellation  ol  dcodsxa  jiQoqrJTai  the  twelve  prophets,  was  us- 
ed before  the  time  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  by  Sirach,  ch.  49: 
10,  and  the  days  of  the  apostles,  by  Josephus,  Antiq.  Lib.  X.  cap. 
2.  <§>  2,  and  afterwards,  by  Eusel3ius,  Hist.  Eccles.  IV.  26. 

Ili^.  13.     Division  of  the  sacred  books  into  three  classes. 

The  entire  passage  of  Josephus,  is  as  follows  f  fin^f  tovvnoyQa- 

1  In  his  book  concerning  the  Maccabees,  ch.  18.  See  also  Illust.  1.  and  the 
New  Repertory,  p.  239.  Note  28. 

5i  Sup.  cit.  p.  232.  3  Contra  Apionem,  Lib.  I.  §  7,  8. 


112  BIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLI>  TESTAMENT.  [bK.   li. 

q>{iv  avTf^ovalov  nciffiv  ovtog,  fAtjii  rivog,Jv  roig  ygacfofievotg  hov- 
erig  ^Kxtptaviag''  wAAa  [aopcov  tojv  ngoc^tjiwp  lu  fAei^  uvoitatw  aul  net- 
XukQiaia  XdCTOi  irjv  ininvotav  zriv  ano  lov  dfou  fxu{)6i/T(ov,  ra  di 
%ad^  iccvTovgy  cog  iyei/^TO  G(xq:»)g  GvyyQu^ovitav^ov  fivgiudeg  ^i^h'tov 
elel  na(}  i^fiojVj  uov^iqcovcnv  xat  f^iuyofiivwv'  dvo  di  ^ova  ngog  Tolg 
t'ixoet  (itfiUa,  tov  navxog  t-AOvta  yjjovov  triv  diuygaqriv,  t«  dtxaltog 
nfniativfit'va  {&67a  ed.  Havercamp.)  Kccc  tovtmv  ntvis  f.iev  iaii  td 
Mmvatbtg^  a  tovg  (if  vd^tovg  ed.  Oberthlir)  jevof-u'vovg  Txigvtyit,  xott 
7i^v  an  av^gm-noyvvlug  TTdQudo.oti',  fif'yg^  rrjg  amov  TfXfVTrjg — duo 
Si  TTJg  3'lcfwato)g  leXevirig  f^itygt  irjg  ^giet'Etglov  rou  jUTaJ^ep^fjv 
TIiQGMv  ^aoiXt'cDg  dgy-^g,  ol  (xna  Mcu'vorjv  ngoqjTiiai>  tql  xai*  «vrou? 
ngayx^ivta  avvtyguxpav  iv  rgial  ucci  dfxa  ^i^Xtoig:.  ^  Al  di  Xotnai  xtG' 
fsageg  vfivovg  fig  tov  ^tov,  xal  zo7g  ccvd^gconoig  vjio^i^xas  xov  ^iov 
Tjigu'yovaiv :  "  Inasmuch  as  not  every  one  who  pleased,  was  per- 
mitted to  write,  and  as  our  writings  contain  no  contradictions  ;  the 
prophets  having  been  taught  by  divine  inspiration  the  earhest  and 
most  ancient  events,  and  having  recorded  with  fidelity  the  history  of 
their  own  tinies  ;  therefore  our  books  are  neither  numerous  nor  con- 
tradictory. The  number  of  our  books  is  only  twenty  two,  contain- 
ing a  universal  history,  and  these,  with  the  utmost  propriety,  claim 
our  belief.  To  these  twenty  two  books,  belong  the  five  books  of  Mo- 
ses, which  describe  the  origin  of  the  human  family,  and  their  whole 
history  until  the  death  of  Moses. — The  prophets  after  Moses,  have, 
in  thirteen  books,  recorded  the  history  of  their  own  times,  from  the 
death  of  Moses  until  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  the  Persian  monarch 
who  succeeded  Xerxes.  The  remaining  four  books  contain  hymns 
of  praise  to  God,  and  practical  precepts  for  the  government  of  man- 
kind.'' A  similar  division  of  the  sacred  books  into  three  classes,  is 
found  in  the  preface  to  the  book  of  Sirach  :  1 ,  vof-iog,  2,  ol  Tigocptj- 
tuij  and  3,  ol  dXloi  ol  xar'  avzovg  rjxoXovdrjxoTf?,  i.  e.  the  other 
books  which,  (like  the  prophets),  follow  after  the  vofxog.  The  au- 
thor of  this  preface  (v.  2)  also  calls  the  third  class,  uXXa  ndTgia 
^c^Xia  other  books  transmitted  to  us  from  our  fathers ;  and  v.  6, 
jd  komd  xMv  ^c^klcof  the  rest  of  the  books.  Philo,i  likewise,  divides 
the  sacred  writings  (ra  hgojiuia  yodfi/nara)  into  1,  vo^ovg — the  Mo- 
saic writings  J  2,  Xoyiu  d^iGnvadii/ia  did  ngocpijKov — oracular  declara- 
tions of  the  prophets  ; — (both  expressions  are  synecdochical)  ;  and  3, 
vfivovg  Tial  rd  akla,  oJg  Ijiigt^ut],  ymi  fuof'^fiu  Gwav^ovrat  xui  li- 
leiovvTttb  hymns  of  praise  and  other  books  by  which  wisdom  and 
piety  are  promoted.  It  is  doubtless  this  same  classification,  which 
is  expressed  in  Luke  24:  44,  by  the  ndvja  id  yiyga^if.iiva  1)  Iv  tia 
vofAO)  Mwvohojg  xai  2)  ngoqi'^Tatg  xai  3)  xlial^ioTg — all  things  which 
were  written  (1)  in  the  law  of  Moses  and  (2)  in  the  prophets  and 
(3)  in  the  Psalms.  The  Psalms,  being  the  first  book  of  the  third 
class,  is  put  by  synecdoche  for  the  whole  class. 

1  De  vita  contemplativa,  p.  893,  ed.  Francof. 


<5>  14.]  ALEXANDR.  CANON SAME  WITH  PALEST.  173 


III.  14.     The  Alexandrian  canon  contained  the  same  twenty  two 
books  as  that  of  Palestine. 

I.  Had  it  been  a  matter  of  public  notoriety,  that  the  Alexandrian 
Jews  had  more,  and  the  Sadducees  fewer  than  twenty  two  books 
which  they  regarded  as  divine,  how  could  Josephus^  have  remark- 
ed, that  "  no  one  has  ever  ventured  either  to  alter,  or  to  add  to,  or 
to  detract  from  these  (twenty  two)  national  books.  For  the  belief 
of  the  divinity  of  these  books  is  instilled  into  all  the  Jews,  from  their 
very  infancy. 

II.  Eichhorn  adduces  the  following  arguments,  to  prove  that  the 
canon  of  the  Egyptian  Jews  contained  no  apocryphal  books,  and 
did  not  differ  from  that  of  Palestine. 

1.  The  Egyptian  Jews  always  had  more  or  less  connexion  with 
those  of  Palestine  ;  and  both  were  solicitous  to  maintain  entire  ac- 
cordance with  each  other. 

2.  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  designates  their  ancient  sacred  books 
substantially  in  the  same  manner,  as  Josephus  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment do  :  viz.  "  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  other  books." 
See  lUust.  12. 

3.  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  distinguishes  very  particularly  the 
moral  sayings  of  his  grandfather,  an  Apocryphal  book,  from  *•  the 
Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  other  writings,"  i.  e.  from  the  sacred 
books  of  the  Jews :  see  his  introduction  or  preface. 

4.  Philo  was  acquainted  with  the  Apocryphal  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  for  he  borrows  phrases  and  expressions  from  them  ;  but 
not  in  a  single  instance  has  he  quoted  any  of  them  ;  much  less  does 
he  allegorize  upon  them,  or  make  use  of  them  to  prove  any  point 
which  he  would  establish. 

Jahn,^  in  opposition  to  these  arguments  in  favour  of  the  identity 
of  the  Egyptian  and  Palestine  canon,  urges  1,  that  the  Egyptian 
Jews  professed  to  be  independent  of  those  of  Palestine,  and  that 
they  maintained  but  little  ecclesiastical  intercourse  ;  2,  that  the  son 
of  Sirach,  and  Philo,  may  have  included  the  Apocrypha  in  the  third 
class  of  books,  without  making  a  fourth  ;  3,  that  several  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  are  not  quoted  by  Philo,  at  least  not  with  the 
accompanying  declaration  of  their  divinity.  From  these  arguments, 
however,  we  can  only  infer,  that  it  is  possible  the  Apocrypha  was 
included  in  the  canon  of  the  Egyptian  Jews.  The  whole  investi- 
gation seems  to  lean  to  the  conclusion,  that  the  apocryphal  books 
might  have  been  regarded  as  deutero-canonical,  books  of  secondary 
authority.     The  arguments  adduced  by  Augusti,  in  his  Introduction 

1  Against  Ap.  B.  I.  §  8.       2  Einleitung,  2te  auflage,  Th.  I.  S.  25.  S.  132  etc. 


174  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

(p.  73),  to  prove  that  the  Egyptian  canon  included  the  Apocrypha, 
are  chiefly  derived  from  Corrodi's  Elucidation  of  the  Bible  canon. 

111.  The  opinion,  that  the  Sadducees  rejected  all  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  canon  excepting  the  five  books  of  Moses,  (which 
was  advanced  by  some  of  the  ancient  fathers,  and  is  considered  as 
probable  by  some  late  critics,  from  the  fact  that  Jesus  proved  (Matt. 
22:  31  etc.)  to  the  Sadducees  the  resurrection,  by  a  quotation  from 
Exodus,^)  is  contradicted  by  Eichhorn  (Introd.'  to  O.  T.  p.  96  etc.) 
on  the  following  grounds  : 

1.  The  sect  of  the  Sadducees  took  their  rise  at  a  time  when  the 
Jewish  canon  had  been  closed ;  and  it  was  just  as  easy  for  them  to 
make  their  opinions  harmonize  with  the  other  books  of  the  old  Tes- 
tament, as  with  the  books  of  Moses. 

2.  Josephus  (Antiq.  B.  Xlll.  c.  10.  <5.  6)  merely  states,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Sadducees,  that  they  adhered  exclusively  to  the  written 
precepts  (tu  yfygafAjiUva)  and  rejected  the  traditions;  he  no  where 
states,  that  they  were  distinguished  from  the  Pharisees  by  the  re- 
jection of  all  the  books  of  the  canon  except  the  Pentateuch. 

3.  How  could  Sadducees  have  sustained  the  office  of  high-priest, 
if  they  had  departed,  in  so  important  a  point,  from  the  belief  of 
the  nation  ? 

III.  15.     The  Jewish  numeration  of  the  sacred  boolcs. 

It  was  customary  among  the  Jews,  to  count  the  books  of  Judges 
and  Ruth,  the  two  books  of  Samuel,  the  two  books  of  Kings,  the 
two  books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  Jeremiah  and  the 
Lamentations,  and  finally,  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  severally,  as 
being  single  books. 

III.  16.  The  books  not  specifically  mentioned  by  Josephus,^  are 
Ecclesiastes  and  the  Song  of  Solomon.  But  these  must  necessa- 
rily be  reckoned  to  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  order  to 
make  up  the  four  books  (Xoinol  Tf'aaaQig),  which  he  expressly  men- 
tions as  belonging  to  the  third  general  class.  For,  that  Josephus 
reckoned  all  the  historical  books  into  the  second  class  (that  of  the 
thirteen  prophets),  may  be  assumed  as  certain.  The  transfer  of 
several  of  the  historical  books  into  the  third  class,  was  probably  of  a 

1  This  opinion  is  modified  in  the  following  manner,  by  Corrodi  (sup.  cit.  p.  110. 
comp.  Paulus'  Comment,  in  Nov.  Test.  Pt.  I.  p.  196.  Pt.  III.  p.  298.  supplement, 
p.  149,  151  etc.):  The  Sadducees  probably  only  attached  a  high  degree  of  value 
to  the  Pentateuch  ;  they  appear  to  have  respected  the  other  books  only  so  far  as 
they  accorded  with  the  Pentateuch  and  were  founded  on  it — "  But  the  dissent  of 
the  Sadducees  from  liie  common  opinion,  is  very  uncertain,  and  is  no  evidence 
against  the  historical  credibility  of  the  twenty  two  cononical  books." 

2  Contra  Apion.  I.  8.  See  also  Illust.  13. 


«5>  14.]  THE  JEWISH  CANON.  175 

later  date.  For,  Philo  describes  the  books  of  the  third  class,  in  the 
same  manner  as  Josephus  does,  namely,  as  books  containing  (chiefly) 
hymns  of  praise  to  God,  and  moral  lessons.  And  as  it  is  certain  that 
several  historical  books,  such  as  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings, 
were  classed  among  those  which  were  strictly  prophetical  (the  sec- 
ond class) ;  what  could  be  more  natural,  than  to  place  also  the  other 
historical  books,  Ruth,  Esther,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  the  Chronicles, 
in  the  same  class,  and  thus  make  the  third  class  to  consist  only  of 
such  as  were  neither  historical  nor  prophetical  ?^ 

Michaelis"^  puts  Job  in  the  place  of  the  Song  of  Solomon,  and 
places  Ruth  instead  of  Job  in  the  second  class  of  thirteen  books,  re- 
garding Ruth  not  as  connected  with  Judges,  but  as  a  distinct  book. 
Camerer,^  by  a  different  process,  excludes  the  Song  of  Solomon  and 
Ecclesiastes  from  the  canon.  He  wishes  to  count  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah, Jeremiah  and  the  Lamentations,  as  four  distinct  books;  and 
to  place  in  the  third  class  the  Lamentations  and  Job,  instead  of  Ec- 
clesiastes and  the  Song  of  Solomon.  But  neither  the  separation  of 
Ruth  from  Judges,  nor  of  Ezra  from  Nehemiah,  nor  of  Jeremiah 
from  the  Lamentations,  will  correspond  with  the  mode  of  calcula- 
tion adopted  by  the  Jews  (lllust.  15),  as  is  evident  from  the  testimo- 
ny of  Origen.  Equally  improbable  is  the  assumption,  that  Job  was 
placed  in  the  third  class,  and  not  in  the  second,  of  which  the  histor- 
ical books  formed  a  part ;  for  the  book  of  Job  was  uniformly,  by  all 
antiquity,  received  as  a  true  history.  It  is  true,  Josephus  does  not 
himself  quote  the  book  of  Job  ;  and  the  reason  probably  was,  that 
in  writing  a  history  of  the  Jews,  he  had  no  occasion  for  quoting  it. 
But  there  cannot  be  the  least  possible  doubt,  that  he  found  it  among 
the  sacred  books  of  his  nation,  among  which  it  is  also  classed  in  the 
New  Testament  (lllust.  9);  and  that,  for  the  reason  stated,  he  plac- 
ed it  in  the  second  class."*  Perhaps  the  book  of  Job  was  subjoined 
to  the  historical  part  of  the  second  class,  as  an  appendix ;  for  it  was 
regarded  as  a  history,  though  not  of  the  Israelites.^ 

1  Repertor.  sup.  cit.  p.  227  etc.  2  Dogmatik,  S.  112  f. 

3  Theolog.  und  kritische  Versuche,  N.  I.  §  14 — 19.  In  addition  to  this  pro- 
position, the  assumption,  that  in  the  time  of  Josephus  the  Song  of  Solomon  and 
Ecclesiastes  did  not  belong  to  the  canon,  is  supported  (in  the  work  sup.  cit.  §  18) 
by  the  conjecture  that  it  seems  that  some  books  were  lost  from  the  canon,  after 
the  days  of  Josephus.  From  Josephus  (Antiquit.  X.  c.  11.  §  7),  where  the  writer 
is  speaking  of  ^i^Xiois  Javir'jXov,  it  is  inferred  that  other  writings  of  Daniel  be- 
side the  Book  of  Daniel,  were  then  in  existence.  In  refutation  of  this,  it  is  re- 
marked (in  the  Tab.  gel.  Anzeig.  for  1764,  No.  74.  p.  590),  that  Josephus  evi- 
dently is  speaking  of  the  writings  of  Daniel  which  have  descended  to  us,  which 
he  divides  into  several  parts  (/?t/?A/a)^  inasmuch  as  every  thing  which  he  there 
quotes  from  these  ^i^Xiots  Javit'ikov,  is  contained  in  our  book  of  Daniel.  See 
Bertholdt's  Daniel,  Erlangen,  1806,  the  Introduction,  p.  86  etc. 

4  Eichhorn,  Pt.  1.  p.  118  etc.  5  Repertor.  sup.  cit.  232. 


176  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  [bK.  I. 

Agreeably  to  what  has  been  said,  the  canon  of  Josephus  is  as  fol- 
lows :  First  class,  the  five  books  of  Moses.  Second  class,  1,  Josh- 
ua ;  2,  Judo^es  and  Ruth  ;  3,  the  two  books  of  Samuel ;  4,  the  two 
books  of  Kings  ;  5,  the  two  books  of  Chronicles ;  6,  Daniel ;  7, 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  ;  8,  Esther  ;  9,  Job  ;  10,  Isaiah  ;  11,  Jere- 
miah and  the  Lamentations;  12,  Ezekiel;  13,  the  twelve  minor 
prophets.  Third  class,  1,  the  Psalms  ;  2,  Proverbs  ;  3,  Ecclesias- 
tes ;  4,  the  Song  of  Solomon. 

III.  17.  Books  of  the  Old  Testament  refered  to  by  Joshphus. 

Among  the  books  not  specifically  named  in  the  New  Testament, 
but  still  used  as  authorities  by  Josephus,  are  Ruth,  both  books  of 
Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther,  and  the  Lamentations  of  Jere- 
miah. 

Eichhorn  in  his  introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,^  quotes  the 
passages  in  which  Josephus  cites  or  alludes  to  the  books  just  men- 
tioned. In  general,  every  book  which  can  be  proved  to  have  been 
known  to  Josephus,  and  which  wgs  not  written  after  the  time  of 
Artaxerxes,  belonged  to  the  canon  of  Josephus.  For  agreeably  to 
the  passage  above  quoted,^  all  the  books  prior  to  the  time  of  Artax- 
erxes, were  written  by  prophets,  and  were  therefore  divine  writings. 
He  closed  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the  time  of  Artax- 
erxes Longimanus ;  for  he  regarded  the  book  of  Esther,  which  he 
supposed  was  written  at  that  time,  as  the  last  of  all  the  Old  Testa- 
ment writings  (Antiq.  B.  XL  c.  6.  «§>  1.) 

III.  18.  On  the  genuineness  and  integrity  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, the  reader  may  [in  addition  to  <§>  4  of  this  work]  consult 
Griesinger  on  the  Authenticity  of  the  Old  Testament,  Stuttgard, 
1804.  and  Jahn's  Introduction  to  the  divine  books  of  the  Old  Cov- 
ienant,  Ft.  I.  §  6—14,  p.  31—66. 


SECTION   XV. 


The  Scriptures  must  be  received  as  a  perfect  rule  (norma)  of  faith 

and  practice. 

From  the  evidence  which  has  been  adduced  (<§»  11 — 13)  in  sup- 
port of  the  divine  authority  and  credibility  of  the  writings  of  the 

'  Pt.  I.  §  47.  2  Illust.  13.— Jos.  contr.  Ap.  Lib.  I.  §  8. 


«5>   15.]  LECSITIMATE  INTERPRET.  OF  SCRIPTURE.  177 

Old  {'^  14)  and  New  (<§»  1 — 11)  Testaments,(l)  as  respects  their 
doctrines,  prophecies,  and  history  ;  it  necessarily  and  spontaneously 
follows,  that  we  are  bound  to  receive  as  divine(2)  all  the  instruc- 
tions and  precepts,  which  are  either  given  by  the  writers  them- 
selves, or  communicated  by  them  as  the  instructions  and  precepts 
of  God  ;(3)  and  to  receive  all  their  statements,  as  indubitably  and 
perfectly  true. (4)  In  short,  the  decisions  which  are  contained  in 
Scripture,  as  soon  as  they  are  satisfactorily  ascertained, (5)  must  be 
received  by  us  as  the  standard  (norma)  for  the  regulation  of  our 
judgments.(6) 

Illustration  1. 

That  nothing  may  be  advanced,  to  which  the  most  anxious  and 
scrutinizing  examination  of  Christianity  can  attach  the  least  shadow 
of  doubt ;  I  shall  seldom  rely,  exclusively,  on  proofs  derived  from 
the  antilegomena  of  the  New  Testament ;  or  on  the  authority  of 
those  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  are  not  exphcitly  quoted 
in  the  New,  as  divine  {§  14.  Ulust.  4,  15,  16)  ;  or  on  books,  the 
authority  of  which  depends  not  merely  on  their  historical  credibili- 
ty, but  also  on  the  divine  authority  of  Mark  and  Luke. 

III.  2.     The  obligation  of  the  divine  precepts. 

Precepts  which  are  given  under  certain  limitations,  are  valid  only 
so  far  as  they  extend.  And  if  it  be  said,  that  some  precepts  are  not 
obligatory  on  men,  or  on  men  in  all  circumstances  ;  this  will  by  no 
means  exclude  them  from  the  catalogue  of  divine  precepts.  The 
reason  why  they  are  not  obligatory  on  certain  persons,  is,  that  God 
did  not  see  fit  to  extend  their  obligation  to  them,  and  not  that  their 
author  is  any  other  being  than  the  common  Lord  of  the  universe. 
In  Koppen's  work  entitled,  "  The  Bible  a  work  of  divine  wisdom,'* 
it  is  remarked,  that  all  the  special  precepts  of  God  are  merely  par- 
ticular apphcations  of  universal  divine  commands  ;  and  that  these 
cannot  be  universal,  because  they  are  limited  to  the  accidental  cir- 
cumstances of  time,  place,  and  persons.  The  reader  may  compare 
Nitzsch's  Programm  on  the  local  and  temporary  precepts  of  the 
christian  ethical  code,  entitled,  De  judicandis  morum  praeceptis  in 
Novo  Testamento  a  communi  omnium  hominum  ac  temporum  usu 
alienis. 

III.  3.     Obligation  of  the  passages  in  which  God  or  a  divine 
messenger  is  introduced  as  speaJcing. 

To  this  class  belong  those  passages  in  which  God  himself  is  in- 
23 


178  D^IVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES.  [bK.  f. 

trodaced  as  speaking,  as  is  often  the  case  in  the  writings  of  the  an- 
cient prophets ;  and  also  those  which  contain  the  declarations  of  a 
divine  messenger,  such  as  an  angel,  or  a  man  the  divinity  of  whose 
mission  is  asserted  by  the  inspired  writer  himself,,  or  by  some  other 
having  divtne  authority.  TlmSy  the  divine  mission  of  John  the 
Baptist  (John  1:  31),  is  confirmed  not  only  by  Luke,  but  also  by 
John  an  apostle,  and  by  Christ  himself.  See  Luke  3:  2.  7: 29,  30. 
JolmliG.  Matt.  11:9—14,  Matt.  91:  25— 35.  John  5:32—35. 

III.  4.     Absolute  historical  credibility  of  the  Scrij)tures^ 

In  the  narrations  of  Scripture,  a  distinction  must  be  made,  be- 
tween historical  truth  and  universal  truth.  These  narratives  are  all 
historically  true,  but  not  all  true  in  every  respect ;  they  possess  the 
latter  character^  only  when  the  sanction  of  the  Scripture  is  added  to 
tliem.  Thus,  when  the  inspired  writers  state,  that  particular  per- 
sons uttered  certain  expressions  or  entertained  certain  opinions  i 
these  expressions  and  opinions  are  not  therefore  to  be  regarded  as 
infallibly  true,  unless  the  Scriptures  express  approbation  of  them. 

III.  5.     The  legitimate  interpretation  of  Scripture,. 

Whenever  the  readrng  of  a  particular  passage  is  unquestionable,, 
and  a  legitimate  exegesis  proves  a  certain  sentiment  to  be  contained 
in  it ;  then,  and  then  only,  is  it  satisfactorily  shown  that  the  passage 
contains  that  sentiment.  Hence,  in  order  to  confer  the  greatest 
possible  degree  of  certainty  on  this  coarse  of  christian  doctrines, 
passages  of  which  there  are  various  readings,  are  never  adduced  in 
this  work,  except  when  the  canons  of  criticism  show  the  reading  ad- 
duced, to  have  preponderating  evidence  in  its  favour ;  and  even 
then  they  are  accompanied  with  other   passages. 

The  Moral  Interpretation,  which  Kant  has  advocated,^  consists  in 
setting  aside  the  laws  of  grammatical  and  historical  interpretation, 
and  attributing  a  moral  meaning  to  those  passages  of  Scripture, 
which,  agreeably  to  grammatical  interpretation,  contain  nothing  co- 
incident with  the  moral  dictates  of  unassisted  reason.  Nothing 
more  is  necessary,  according  to  this  hypothesis,  than  that  it  be  pos- 
sible to  attach  a  moral  meaning  to  the  passage,  no  matter  how  forc- 
ed or  unnatural  it  be.  In  the  "  Historical  and  critical  view  of  the  in- 
fluence of  Kant's  philosophy  on  the  different  branches  of  science 
and  practical  divinity,"  is  a  statement  of  the  different  works  and  dis- 
sertations on  Kant's  mode  of  interpretation,  with  some  account  of 
the  arguments  for  and  against  it ;  see  also  Schmidt's  work  "  On  the 

1  Religion  innerhalb  den  Grenzen  der  blossen  Vernunflt,  S.  150—153,  and 
Streit  der  Facultaten,  S.  49— 5G. 


"§>   15.]  SOME  DOCTRINES  NOT  TAUGHT  BY  REASON.  179 


christian  religion  etc."  The  following  are  the  principal  arguments 
which  have  been  urged  against  this  mode  of  interpretation,  by  Nos- 
sek,  Rosenmiiller,  the  author  of  this  work,i  and  others  : 

1.  Such  a  mode  of  explaining  Scripture,  does  not  deserve  the 
name  of  an  interpretation ;  for  this  moral  interpreter  does  not  in- 
quire what  the  Scriptures  actually  do  teach,  by  their  own  declara- 
tions, but  what  they  ought  to  teach  agreeably  to  his  opinions. 

2.  The  principle  is  incorrect,  which  is  assumed  as  the  basis  of 
this  mode  of  interpretation,  namely,  "  that  the  grammatical  sense  of 
a  passage  of  Scripture  cannot  be  admitted,  or  at  least  is  of  no  use 
in  ethics,  whenever  it  contains  a  sentiment  which  reason  alone  could 
not  discover  and  substantiate." 

3.  Such  a  mode  of  interpretation  is  altogether  unnecessary ;  for 
the  Bible  is  abundantly  sufficient  for  our  instruction  in  religion  and 
morality,  if  its  precepts  are  construed  as  applying  directly  or  by 
consequence  to  the  moral  necessities  of  every  man.  And,  although 
there  are  passages  of  difficult  explanation  in  the  Bible,  as  might 
naturally  be  expected  from  the  antiquity  and  peculiar  languages  of 
the  Scriptures ;  yet,  in  most  instances  these  passages  do  not  relate 
Co  doctrines ;  and  when  they  do,  the  doctrines  in  question  are  gen- 
erally taught  in  other  and  plainer  passages. 

4.  As,  on  this  plan,  the  mere  possibility  of  attaching  a  moral  im- 
port to  a  text,  is  regarded  as  a  sufficient  sanction  for  regarding  it  as 
the  true  signification ;  almost  every  passage  must  be  susceptible  of 
a  multitude  of  interpretations,  as  was  the  case  during  the  reign  of 
the  mystical  and  allegorical  mode  of  interpretation  which  has  long 
since  been  exploded.  This  must  produce  confusion  in  religious  in- 
struction, want  of  confidence  in  the  Bible,  and  indeed  a  suspicion  as 
to  its  divine  authority  ;  for  this  must  be  the  natural  effect  of  the 
moral  mode  of  interpretation  on  the  majority  of  minds. 

5.  If  such  a  mode  of  interpreting  the  doctrines  of  Christianity 
should  prevail,  it  is  not  seen,  how  insincerity  and  deceit,  on  the 
part  of  interpreters,  are  to  be  detected  and  exposed, 

III.  6.     No  necessity  that  every  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures^ 
should  be  taught  by  reason  also. 

After  the  existence  and  the  attributes  of  God  have  once  been 
proved  (<5>  IT — 26)  [they  are  presupposed,  whenever  we  receive 
any  testimony  as  divine,  and  as  therefore  worthy  of  our  entire  con- 
fidence,] the  examinations  of  the  doctrine  of  Christianity,  is  a  his- 
torical investigation.  The  credibility  of  what  the  Scriptures  teach, 
depends  on  their  authority.     And  although  it  may  be  a  desirable 

i  Observations  on  Kant's  philosophical  religious  doctrines,  §  17. 


180         PROOF  FROM  PERSONAL  EXPERIENCE.  [bK.  I. 

thing  to  have  other  arguments,  derived  from  reason  and  experience, 
ki  support  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  ;  still,  it  is  by  no  means 
necessary  that  every  doctrine  should  be  confirmed  by  the  dictates  of 
reason,  or  by  arguments  derived  from  the  nature  of  things.  For, 
should  we  receive  any  doctrine  merely  upon  the  authority  of  Scrip- 
ture, without  any  other  proof,  we  should  still  be  acting  rationally  ; 
we  should  be  doing  precisely  what  all  men  do  when  they  believe 
any  thing  on  the  testimony  of  credible  witnesses,  without  having 
any  other  evidence  of  its  truth.  Nor  do  we  by  this  course  discard 
the  use  of  our  reason  ;  for  our  reason  is  exercised  in  the  investiga- 
tion of  the  genuineness,  the  import,  and  the  authority,  of  the  testi- 
mony of  the  sacred  writers.  Reason  is  also  employed  in  the  com- 
parison and  combination  of  the  doctrines  learned  from  the  Scriptures, 
with  one  another  and  with  other  doctrines. 

The  reasonableness  of  believing  doctrines  which  cannot  be  proved 
from  the  principles  of  reason,  and  the  truth  of  which  rests  solely  on 
the  authority  of  a  historical  basis  ;  is  discussed  in  Annotationes  ad 
philosophicam  Kantii  de  religione  doctrinam,  <^  III,  VII,  XV.  The 
objections  against  the  moral  and  metaphysical  possibility  of  positive 
doctrines,  (i.  e.  of  doctrines  taught  by  a  divine  revelation,  but  which 
reason  alone  could  not  have  discovered,)  contained  in  Fichte's 
"  Critique  on  all  Revelations,"  in  his  work  "  On  Religion  as  a 
Science,"  1795,  and  in  other  works ;  are  answered  in  the  follow- 
ing works :  "  Remarks  on  the  evidence  of  the  possibility  and  reality 
of  a  revelation,  derivable  from  the  moral  dictates  of  reason,"  by 
Siisking,  in  the  supplement  to  his  German  translation  of  "  Annot. 
ad.  Kantii  philosophicam  de  religione  doctrinam." — "  How  can  the 
absolute  divinity  of  a  professed  revelation  be  ascertained  ?" — "  On 
the  province  of  reason  in  the  negative  determination  of  the  import  of 
a  revelation,"  by  Siiskind. — A  review  of  the  work  entitled,  "  Neue 
Erklarung  des  hochstwichtigen  Paulinischen  Gegensatzes,  Buchstabe 
und  Geist." — and  Staudlin's  Dogmatik  und  Dogmengeschichte. 


SECTION   XVI. 


Evidence  of  the  divinity  of  the  Scriptures,  derived  from  personal 

experience* 

Persons  not  religiously  disposed,  may,  prior  to  any  examination 
into  the  truth  of  the  christian  doctrines,  be  prejudiced  against  them. 


j  [4»  16.  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  NEW  SCRIPTURES.  I8l 

'  by  the  fear  of  condemnation  from  them,  John  7:  7.  3:  19  etc.    But 
whoever  strives  to  Hve  to  the  glory  of  God,  and  so  as  to  meet  the 
divine  approbation,(l)  will  be  kept  from  such  a  premature  condem- 
nation of  Christianity, (2)  by  the  consideration,  that  its  precepts  offer 
him  a  prospect  of  becoming  better  acquainted  with  the  will  of  God. 
!  He  will  be  willing  to  examine  Christianity  closely,  because  he  ex- 
pects, that  if  it  be  of  divine  origin,  it  will  approve  his  zeal  in  the 
cause  of  virtue,  and  stimulate  him  to  greater  exertion,  John  3:  21. 
Nor  is  the  hope  a  delusive  one.     For,  the  more  he  studies  and 
follows  In  his  practice  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  the  more  will  he 
find  by  his  own  experience,  that  he  is  advancing  in  the  knowledge 
of  that  truth  which   makes  him   happy,  which  gives  peace  to  his 
!  mind,  and  meliorates  his  heart.     And  thus  wUi  his  own  experience 
satisfy  him  of  the  divinity  of  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  John  7: 
17  ;  or  of  the  truth  of  the  account  which  its  first  teachers  give  of  its 
origin.     I  should,  indeed,  hesitate  to  infer,  merely  from   the  salu- 
tary influence  of  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  on  the  mind,  that  they 
were    promulgated    by  the    extraordinary  and    direct  agency   of 
iGod;(3)  for  I  fear  I  should  be  unable  to  render  this  proof  sufficient- 
iy  evident  to  others. (4)     Nevertheless,  it  is  undeniable,  that  the 
credibility  of  the  declarations  of  Jesus  and   his  apostles,  (which  is 
>the  general  ground  for  belief  in  the  divine  authority  of  the  doctrines 
of  Christianity,  and  of  the  holy  Scriptures  generally,)  is  greatly  cor- 
roborated and  rendered  in  a  high  degree  probable,(5)  by  the  follow- 
ing considerations:  first;    all  who  make  a  conscientious  use  of  the 
christian  doctrines,  experience  precisely  those   effects  from  them, 
I  which  a  divine  revelation  must  produce  ;  or,  In   other  words,  the 
1  Bible  accomplishes  precisely  what  we  have  a  right  to  expect  from  a 
divine  revelation. (6)  Secondly ;  a  conscientious  use  of  the  doctrines 
of  Christianity,  must  excite  a  feehng  of  high  reverence  for  the  ex- 
panded views  and  the  great  piety  of  the  persons(7)  who  first  pub- 
lished these  doctrines.     And  those  who,  by  such  an  intimate  ac- 
quaintance  with  Christianity,  have   become  the   subjects  of  this 
feeling  of  high  reverence,(8)   will  be  impressed  with  the  thought, 
that  such  doctrines,  could  not  have  originated  from  these  men,  who 
were  nearly  all  totally  void  of  education,  John  7:  15.  Acts  4:  13. 
And  this  consideration  will  add  to  the  credibility  of  their  statement, 


182  IN  WHAT  SENSE  INSPIRED.  [bK.  I. 

that  they  had  the  assistance  of  God  in  publishing  these  doctrines. 
Or  at  least,  it  will  appear  unwarrantable  to  charge  men  so  far  sur- 
passing the  best  and  most  learned  teachers  of  their  age,  with  such 
a  degree  of  enthusiasm  or  villany,(9)  as  must  be  ascribed  to  them, 
if  their  pretensions  to  a  divine  influence  were  either  a  delusion  or 
an  imposture. 

Illustration  1. 

The  religious  man,  a  more  impartial  judge  of  revelation,  than  the 

irreligious. 

John  3:  22,  6  noioHv  ttjv  aXrii^nav — Iv  •&i(o  iattv  iigyaa^uva  (tcc 
tgya  avTOv)  "  He  who  endeavours  to  live  uprightly  and  conscientious- 
ly, will  have  a  regard  to  God  in  all  his  conduct,  will  strive  to  do  the 
will  of  God,  and  to  promote  the  divine  glory  ;  in  short,  he  will  en- 
deavour to  conduct  himself  in  a  religious  manner."  Hochv,  (exer- 
cere,  colere,  nt5:?,)  is  used  to  denote  the  acting  out  or  manifesting 
of  an  attribute  or  quality  of  the  mind,  in  other  passages  also  ;  as  is 
proved  in  the  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis  dixaiog,  Note  36  ;  see  Luke 
1:  72,  51 .  Gen.  24:  12.  '^Xi]&eia  signifies  integrity,  uprightness  ; 
see  1  Cor.  13:  6,  where  it  stands  opposed  to  ddnda ;  and  also  Prov. 
28:  6.  * E^ya^eaOuL  ra  tQya  iv  ^ico  may  signify  1)  to  have  a  regard 
to  God  in  what  we  do  ;  see  iv  in  Matt.  23:  30.  Luke  16:  10,  12. 
2  Cor.  8:  18.  2)  to  do  things  for  God's  sake  ;  Matt.  6:  7.  12:  5, 
iv  Tw  hgca  for  the  sake  of  the  temple ;  see  Dissert.  I.  in  librorum 
N.  Test,  aliquot  loca,  p.  34.  (Ev  ^eco  is  sometimes  used  for  the 
simple  dative  '&{(»;  as  in  2  Cor.  5:  11,  iv  zaTg  Gvveidi^aea^v  which 
words  correspond  to  the  simple  dative  &im ,  and  in  8:  l.iv  raJg 
ixKXt^aiaig,  instead  of  ianlrjaiaig ;  and  in  Acts  4:  12,  dedofiivov  iv 
av^Qwnovg,  for  dvd^QMnotg.  In  such  cases,  the  dative  has  these  two 
significations:  in  reference  to,  as  1  Cor.  14:  20,  xri  naicia.—2  Cor. 
11:  6,  TQ>  Aoyo),  ztj  yvwaa. — Rom.  6:  20,  dcxaioauv?], — 1  Cor.  9:  21. 
and  on  account  of;  as  in  Rom.  14:  6,  xvgtco. — 1  Cor.  9:  22,  To7g  ndac.) 

3)  agreeably  to  the  will  of  God  ;    see  Kypke  on  Rom.  14:  7.  and 

4)  to  the  glory  of  God  ;  2  Cor.  5:  13.  The  same  signification 
sometimes  belongs  to  the  preposition  eig,  as  Kypke  (on  Luke  12: 
21)  has  shown,  from  the  phrase  eig  '&e6v. 

III.  2.  The  reader  may  consult,  on  this  subject,  the  Disserta- 
tion on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  attached  to  the  (author's) 
Commentary  on  the  Hebrews,  p.  684  etc. 

III.  3.     The  nature  of  the  extraordinary  agency  of  God,  in  the 
publication  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 

It  is  to  a  conviction  of  the  extraordinary  agency  of  God  in  the 


<§>  16.]  IN  WHAT  SENSE  INSPIRED.  183 

promulgation  of  Christianity,  that  Jesus  refers,  when  he  asserts 
(John  7:  17),  that  those  who  strive  to  perform  the  will  of  God, 
shall  know,  that  he  did  not  derive  his  doctrines  from  himself  (*§ 
iavTOv) ;  and  that  they  are  not  so  much  his  doctrines  as  God's  (v. 
16,  comp.  <§>  6)  ;  that  is,  that  they  are  in  the  strictest  sense  divine. 
Those  who  infer  the  divinity  of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  solely  from 
their  accordance  with  the  dictates  of  reason  ;  and  regard  them  as  of 
divine  origin,  in  no  other  sense  than  that  in  which  all  truth  is  of 
God ;  not  only  make  a  false  appeal  to  the  declarations  of  Jesus,  who 
asserted  the  divinity  of  his  doctrines  in  quite  a  different  sense  (John 
7  :  17)  ;  but  they  also  entirely  change  the  point  in  question.  For 
when,  in  the  discussions  of  doctrinal  theology,  we  examine  the  di- 
vine origin  and  authority  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  we  are  not  in- 
quiring concerning  the  truth  of  the  particular  doctrines  which  can  be 
comprehended  and  proved  by  human  reason ;  but  we  are  inquiring 
concerning  a  special  aid  and  influence  of  God,  which  it  is  contend- 
ed that  Jesus  possessed  above  all  other  teachers ;  an  influence,  of 
such  a  nature  as  to  form  a  distinct  ground  of  credibility,  independent 
of  the  visible  truth  of  the  doctrines  themselves.  The  question  is 
not,  shall  we  believe  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  under  the  same  condi- 
tions that  we  believe  the  declarations  of  any  other  teacher,  namely, 
provided  our  reason  discovers  them  to  be  true ;  but  the  question  is, 
shall  we  believe  the  instructions  of  Jesus,  under  circumstances  in 
which  we  would  not  credit  any  other  teacher,  who  was  not  under 
the  special  influence  of  God  ;  that  is,  when  we  cannot  be  convinced 
of  the  truth  of  the  doctrines  from  visible  marks  of  truth  upon  them, 
independently  of  the  authority  of  the  teacher.^  It  is  useless  to 
speak  of  a  Revelation,  if  we  attribute  to  Jesus  no  other  inspiration, 
than  what  the  naturalist  will  concede  to  him,  and  which  may  just  as 
well  be  attributed  to  the  Koran,  and  to  every  other  pretended  reve- 
lation ;  nay,  to  all  teachers  of  religion ;  that  is,  if  we  receive  only 
those  doctrines  w^hose  truth  is  manifest  to  the  eye  of  reason  ;  and 
call  them  divine,  only  because  all  truth  is  derived  from  God  the  au- 
thor of  our  reason.  It  is  not  a  mere  mediate  revelation,  but  an  im- 
mediate and  supernatural  one,  which  is  here  the  subject  of  inquiry  ; 
and  the  existence  of  such  a  revelation  must  be  either  asserted,  or  un- 
conditionally denied.  For,  to  retain  the  name  of  Revelation,  and 
yet  to  believe  only  in  such  a  mediate  revelation  as  the  naturalist 
will  admit,  is  nothing  else  than  a  covert  denial  of  all  real  revelation. 
The  question  is  not,  whether  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  can  be 
comprehended  and  proved  by  reason  ;  but,  whether  the  origin  of 
Christianity  is  divine,  in  such  a  sense,  that  the  truth  of  the  christian 
doctrines  can  be  inferred  from  the  divinity  of  their  origin,  no  matter 


See  Observations  on  Kant's  religious  Philosophy,  Note  339. 


184  DIVINE  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES.  [bK. 


whether  they  can  be  comprehended  by  reason  or  not  J  For  the  doc- 
trines of  Christianity  might  be  true,  and  yet  not  be  a  divine  revelation ; 
and  on  the  other  hand,  they  may  be  divinely  revealed,  and  yet  reason 
not  be  able  to  perceive  their  truth  from  their  intrinsic  nature.^ 

III.  4.      The  basis  on  which  the  internal  evidence  rests. 

On  this  subject,  the  reader  may  consult  Koppen.  It  rests  on  the 
following  principle  :  "  these  doctrines,  which  are  of  so  salutary  a 
nature,  so  well  calculated  to  promote  the  health  and  tranquillity  of 
the  soul,  to  produce  a  joyful  hope,  and  to  urge  us  on  in  the  path  of 
virtue,  and  whose  influence  can  be  learned  only  by  experience, — 
these  doctrines  cannot  be  derived  from  any  other  being  than  God ; 
for  he  alone  is  fully  acquainted  with  the  manifold  wants  and  diseases 
and  necessities  of  the  soul  of  man,  and  he  alone  possesses  sufficient 
wisdom  and  power  to  discover  and  to  put  into  operation  remedies 
for  them  the  most  efficient  and  salutary." 

III.  5.     Personal  experience. 

As  we  recur  to  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  to  establish 
the  truth  of  their  testimony  concerning  the  divinity  of  their  mission 
and  doctrines  (<5>  8,  10,  36;)  so  also  each  individual  can  recur  to  his 
own  personal  experience  in  order  to  convince  himself  of  the  credi- 
bility of  this  testimony.  This  conviction  of  the  divinity  of  Christian- 
ity, which  is  the  result  of  a  proper  use  of  the  christian  doctrines 
accompanied  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  commonly  ter- 
med the  testimony  of  the  Holy  Spirit.^  But  we  cannot,  as  yet, 
presuppose  the  cooperation  of  God  during  the  conscientious  use  of 
the  christian  doctrines ;  for  we  are  discussing  the  question  of  the 
divinity  of  those  Scriptures,  from  which  the  doctrine  of  the  aid  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  must  first  be  proved.  (<J  115.) 

III.  6.     The  influence  of  Christianity  is  such  as  might  be  expected 
from  a  divine  revelation. 

The  fact,  that  the  christian  doctrines  exert  just  such  an  influence 
as  might  be  expected  from  doctrines  having  a  divine  origin,  may  at 
least  serve  to  remove  doubts  as  to  the  credibility  of  the  testimony 
of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  concerning  the  divinity  of  their  doctrines  ; 
it  is  a  negative  proof  in  favour  of  this  testimony.  Brenner,  in  his 
Historlco-philosophical  view  of  Revelation  as  an  introduction  to 

1  Kant's  Religion  innerhalb  den  Grantzen  der  blossen  Veruunfl,  S.  217. 

2  See  Plank's  Introduction  to  the  theological  sciences, 
y  Morus  Epitom.     Theol.  Christ,  p.  40,  2d  ed. 


§  16.]  PROOF  FROM  PERSONAL  EXPERIENCE.  185 

theology,  has  laid  too  much  stress  upon  this  evidence.  Notwith- 
standing this  experience,  we  may  find  many  difficulties  in  some  of 
the  christian  doctrines :  and  yet  he  who  has  given  them  a  careful 
and  conscientious  examination,  has  learned  by  experience,  that 
many  difficulties,  which  at  first  looked  formidable,  disappeared  on  a 
closer  investigation.  And  hence  he  may  justly  infer,  that  those 
points  which  have  hitherto  baffled  the  most  profound  investigation, 
are  not  on  that  account  to  be  regarded  as  involved  in  contradiction 
or  error.  And  this  modesty  of  judgment  will  increase,  in  proportion 
as  a  conscientious  practical  regard  to  the  doctrines  and  precepts  of 
Christianity  awakens  in  the  breast  a  stronger  and  more  lively  feeling 
of  their  excellence  ;  and  it  will  of  itself  deter  from  that  temerity, 
which  would  forthwith  reject  the  evidence  of  the  truth  of  those 
doctrines  whose  salutary  influence  has  been  learned  by  experience, 
on  account  of  some  remaining  difficulties  attending  them.  A  con- 
viction of  the  salutary  influence  of  the  christian  doctrines,  will  make 
us  regard  an  impartial  examination  of  them  and  of  the  evidence  of 
their  truth,  as  a  most  important  and  desirable  thing  ;  and,  conse- 
quently, will  not  suffer  us  either  to  let  the  truth  of  Christianity  re- 
main unexamined,  or  to  make  unjust  demands,  or  conduct  to  our 
investigation  with  a  partial  hand. 

III.  7.     The  reverence  for  the  inspired  writers 

Which  arises  from  a  perusal  of  their  works,  is  illustrated  by  what 
is  said  in  <5>  7,  where  the  character  of  Jesus  is  adduced  as  proof  of 
the  divinity  of  his  doctrines. 

III.  8.     The  extent  of  the  evidence  of  personal  experience. 

From  the  nature  of  this  evidence,  it  necessarily  results,  that  it 
can  have  no  influence  on  any,  except  such  as  have  themselves  ex- 
perienced the  salutary  influence  and  power  of  Christianity. 

III.  9.  The  reader  may  consult  1  Thess.  2:  3.  1  Cor.  15:  15. 
and  <^  8.  Illust.  7,  as  well  as  Bogue's  Essay  on  the  divine  authority 
of  the  New  Testament,  translated  from  the  English  by  Blumhardt, 
Basel,  1808,  ch.  1,  2,  where  the  internal  evidence  for  the  divine 
authority  of  the  New  Testament  is  discussed. ' 

24 


I 


BOOK   II 

OP  GOD. 


PART  I. 

IDEA   OF    GOD,    AND    THE    TRUTH    OF    THIS    IDEA. 

SECTION  XVII, 

Even  conscience  teaches  that  there  is  a  God, 

Man  is  led  by  the  spontaneous  impulse  of  his  nature,  to  prescribe 
to  himself  certain  rules  for  the  regulation  of  his  conduct.  And  such 
is  the  influence  of  these  prescriptions  on  him,(l)  that  when  he  ex- 
amines(2)  his  actions  by  them,  although  he  is  far  removed  from  all 
visibles  judges  of  his  conduct,(3)  he  excuses  or  accuses  himself, 
just  as  if  he  were  arraigned  before  some  visible  tribunal  (Rom.  2: 
14 — 16.  1 :  32). (4)  The  very  constitution  of  the  human  soul,  there- 
fore, leads  us  to  fear  an  invisible  Judge,  who  punishes  wickedness 
with  misery,  and  dispenses  happiness  as  the  reward  of  virtue. (5) 

Illustration  L 

The  influence  of  the  unwritten  Jaw, 

See  Rom.  2:  14.  In  the  preceding  (13th)  verse,  the  apostle 
says,  that  although  the  Jews  have  a  written  law  of  God,  they  are 
not  on  that  account  pleasing  to  God  ;  on  the  contrary,  as  soon  as 
they  transgress  the  law,  the  law  itself  condemns  them :  ooov  iv  tw 
vofiM  ijfiaQTOVj  dta  vofAov  x()*^?;aoi/rat(12).  He  now,  in  the  four- 
teenth verse,  proves  the  first  proposition  advanced  in  the  twelfth : 
namely,  "  that  those  who  have  not  a  written  law,  may  sin  and  merit 


188  OF  Goir.  [bk.  n. 


punishment,"  ooa  dvoficog  ri^iaQxovj  uvu(A(ag  xai  anoXouviat.  (For 
the  yccQ  in  v.  13,  indicates,  that  verse  13  contains  the  proof  of  what 
was  asserted  in  the  latter  member  of  the  12th  verse  ;  but  the  yocg  m 
verse  14,  indicates,  that  verse  14th  contains  the  proof  of  the  Jirst 
member  of  the  12th  verse.  Or,  verses  13  and  14  taken  in  connex- 
ion, contain  the  proof  of  the  whole  of  verse  12 ;  and  this  proof  is 
indicated  by  the  yccg  twice  repeated,  ^t  antem  might  have  been 
used  for  one  yuQ  ;  as  appears  from  a  comparison  of  Matt.  6:  32  with 
Luke  12:  30.  Such  a  duplicate  yag  occurs  also  in  Phil.  3: 18,20, 
where  both  refer  to  the  exhortation  in  v.  17).^  The  heathen,  (says 
the  apostle,  v.  14),  although  they  have  not  a  written  law  of  God, 
are  a  law  of  God  unto  themselves  ;  or  they  have  a  kind  of  divine 
law  within  them  ;  for,  without  a  written  law,  they  are  led  by  na- 
ture alone  to  do  what  a  law  commonly  effects  ;  namely,  to  give 
then>selves  commands  and  prohibitions,  and  to  dispense  to  them- 
selves rewards  and  punishments:  comp.  Rom.  1:  32  and  Gal.  3: 
12.  That,  in  the  case  of  the  heathen,  nature  actually  supplies  the 
place  of  a  written  law  (la  lov  vo^ov  notii)',  or,  that  the  command- 
ing influence  and  authority  which  belong  to  an  outward  law  {to  i'g- 
yov  Tou  vQf.iov),  do  manifest  themselves  in  the  heathen,  naturally  and 
spontaneously  ;  is  proved  from  the  fact,  that  the  conscience  of  the 
heathen  has  precisely  the  effect  of  an  external  law  {avf^fiafjiugov- 
GtiQ^  avzixiv  rrjg  nvviidr,ai(oq  sc.  otviM,^  i.  e.  iw  i'ypw  tou  vofiov),'^  be- 
cause their  own  feelings  either  accuse  or  excuse  them.  It  appears, 
therefore,  that  the  apostle  proves,  from  what  is  called  the  animad- 
versions of  conscience,  tha;  there  is  a  law  in  man,  which  supplies 
the  place  of  an  outward  law,  by  prescribing  to  him  his  duty  and 
threatening  him  with  punishment  if  he  transgress. 

•  Vide  Dissert,  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Philipp.  ch.  3:  20,  note  n.  (Opuscul. 
Acad.  Vol.  I  p.  349  etc  )  on  the  Ep.  to  the  Coloss.  3:  25,  note  61.  (Opusc.  Acad. 
Vol.  II.  p  202  )  This  idiom  deserves  notice,  because  fn  other  languages  the 
conjunction/yr  (enim,  )'«'(»)  commonly  refers  only  to  the  proposition  immediate- 
ly preceding,  and  not  to  one  more  remote;  and  hence,  when  ydg  occurs  twice 
successively,  the  latter  is  apt  to  be  viewed  as  referring  to  the  former,  or  as  con- 
taining the  proof  of  a  proof;  whereas  the  latter  yuQ  indicates  a  proof  of  the  same 
proposition  to  which  the  preceding  yuQ  referred. 

2  ^vfifiazvQUi — to  coincide  or  harmonize  with  (to  confirm)  any  thing;  Rom. 
8:  16.  Heb.  10:  15. 

3  The  ellipsis  of  the  pronoun  «Jrw,  is  illustrated  by  examples  from  other  texts, 
in  tl»e  "  Dissertation  on  somo  passages  of  the  lesser  epistles  of  Paul,"  1792, 
Note  41. 

4  Kal  fiSTu^v  eic.  this  xal  is  what  is  (ermed  the  -a at  t^TfyijTtxdv ,  whicJi  indi- 
cates that  the  sentence  following  it  is  only  an  explanation  of  the  preceding,  and 
which  maybe  translated  by  wy/7fteZ//,  or,  nempe,  sive.  This  is  its  meaning  in 
Mark  15:  1,  in  the  phrase  y.ai  oXov  ro  avviSQiov  the  high  priests,  and  elders,  and 
scribes,  that  is  (or  in  a  word),  the  whole  sanhedrim.  John  8:  32,  "  then  ye  shall 
be  my  genuine  disciples,  that  is  (xcu),  ye  shall  learn  to  iinow  the  truth  in  such 
a  manner  that  the  truth  shall  make  you  free." 


«5>   17.}  THE  DIVINE   EXISTENCE.  189 


III.  2.      Origin  of  religion,  and  etymology  of  the  word. 

As  it  is  so  natural  for  man  to  review  the  train  of  his  past  actions 
it  is  not  incredible  that  the  word  religion  is  derived  from  relegere  ; 
and  that  its  primary  reference  is  to  that  activity  of  conscience  which 
leads  us  to  review  the  past  actions  of  our  hves.  By  those  feelings 
which  our  consciences  excite  while  we  are  reviewing  our  past  con- 
duct, we  are  naturally  led  on  to  the  idea  of  a  higher  power  on  which 
we  are  dependent ;  and  thus  we  come  to  acknowledge  and  rever- 
ence a  God.  In  conscience,  therefore,  we  must  look  for  the  origin 
of  religion.  This  derivation  of  religion,  accords  with  the  well  known 
explanation  of  its  origin,  as  being  developed  by  fear  and  terror. 
Cicero  says  :^  Qui  omnia,  quae  ad  cultum  pertinerent,  diligenter 
retractarent,  et  tanquam  retegerent,  sunt  dicti  religiosi.-  And  Gel- 
lius^  quotes  from  a  very  ancient  poem,  the  following  verse  :  "  Rele- 
gentem  esse  oportet,  religiosum  nefas."  Religiosus  is  appellabatur, 
qui  nimia  et  supersiitiosa  religione  sese  alligaverat."*  Terentius 
Varro,^  on  the  contrary,  and  after  him  Lactantius,^  derive  the  word 
religio  from  religare,  or,  as  the  latter  expressed  himself,  "  a  vinculo 
pietatis,  quo  Deo  obstricti  et  religati  sumus,"  (i.  e.  from  the  bond 
of  piety,  by  which  we  are  bound  and  obligated  to  God).  And 
Clodius,  in  his  "  Sketch  of  a  system  of  universal  religious  doctrine," 
traces  its  origin  to  relinquere  (to  forsake).^ 

III.  3.  This  idea  seems  to  be  expressed  by  the  words  ^ixalv 
aXlriXwv^  Rom.  2:  15.  The  meaning  of  the  apostle  seems  to  be, 
"  The  thoughts  and  feelings  of  the  heathen  either  excuse  or  accuse 
them  (the  heathen),^  on  account  of  their  secret  acts  (f«  xqvtitu 
Toji/  dvOgojnojv,  v.  16)  with  one  another  only,  i.  e.  without  any  one 
from  without  to  awaken  those  feelings."  Comp.  Matt.  18:  15. 
Koppe,  in  his  "  Commentary  on  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,"  p.  54, 
explains  the  passage  thus  :  "  Their  own  principles  shall  hereafter 
accuse  or  excuse  them,  etc."  He  takes  aUrj?,o}v  as  synonymous 
with  tavTMv,  and  ^leTa'iv  with  tneua  postea.  But  to  make  allriXojv 
equivalent  to  tavxMv  in  the  signification  own,  is  unauthorized ;  not- 

1  De  Nat.  Deor.  II.  28. 

2  [i.  e.  Those  who  carefully  reviewed,  and  as  it  were  reconsidered  the  things 
which  related  to  worship,  were  called  religious.     S.] 

3  Noct.  Attic.  IV.  9. 

4  [i.  e.  "  To  be  in  the  habit  of  reviewing  our  conduct,  is  proper;  but  it  is 
criminal  to  be  religious;"  for  those  were  termed  religious  who  burdened  them- 
selves by  an  excessive  and  superstitious  religion.     S.] 

5  De  lingua  Latina,  Lib.  V.  p.  C8.  ed.  Bip. 

6  Instit.  Div.  IV.  28.  7  p.  11.  Note  6,  Leipsic  1808. 
8  Here  airov's  must  again  be  supplied;  cotnp.  Illust.  1.  note  3. 


190  OF  GOD  [bK.  II. 

withstanding,  lavzav  may  be  substituted  for  aAA^iAwv,  as  in  Eph.  4: 
32,  (xagi^Ofisvoi  iavtoig)^  where  iavzoTg  is  put  for  aXXrjXotg.  The 
word  f^iTa^v  has  indeed  the  signification  afterwards,  which  Koppe 
here  adopts,  (as  in  Acts  13:  42);^  yet,  in  this  place,  the  genitive 
aXXi^Xojv  proves,  that  fisra^v  is  a  preposition  and  not  an  adverb,  and 
consequently  that  it  cannot  be  connected  with  the  subsequent  words 
itf  'ni^tQtty  as  Koppe  proposes.^ 

III.  4.     The  agency  of  conscience  proves  a  future  judgment. 

Those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel,  that 
God  had  determined  to  bring  all  the  secret  acts  of  men  before  a 
judgment,  which  is  to  be  held  by  Jesus  Christ ;  can  discover  the 
cause  of  that  wonderful  inward  agency.  It  is  because  of  this  future 
time  {tv  Vf*^9^  propter  tempus)^  of  a  judgment  to  come,  because 
we  must  render  an  account  to  God  for  all  our  thoughts  and  actions ; 
that  God  has  implanted  that  activity  in  our  consciences  which  is 
described  in  the  15th  verse.  If  a  sense  of  dependance  on  an  invis- 
ible judge  were  not  implanted  in  us,  we  should  be  lulled  to  rest,  by 
the  reflection  that  we  have  taken  the  course  we  chose,  and  that  no 
one  is  able  to  punish  us  for  it.  Of  our  own  inability  to  reward  vir- 
tue and  punish  vice,  we  are  convinced,  by  our  experience  of  our 
own  weakness  and  inability  to  direct  external  circumstances  accord- 
ing to  our  will. 

III.  5.     This  moral  dictation  is  founded  on  the  original  structure 
of  the  human  soul. 

See  Kant's  work  entitled,  Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft.'*  The  passage 
which  more  especially  refers  to  this  subject,  is  this  :  "  Suppose  the 
case  of  a  person,  at  a  time  when  his  moral  sensibility  is  most  acute 
and  active ;  suppose,  that  in  this  state  of  mind  he  finds  himself  un- 
der the  pressure  of  duties  which  he  can  perform  only  by  some  vol- 
untary sacrifice,  and  that  this  sacrifice  he  resolves  to  make ;  he  now 
feels  within  him  a  conviction,  that  he  has  done  something  which  was 
commanded  to  be  done,  that  he  has  yielded  obedience  to  a  sove- 
reign ruler.  Or  if  he  has  unintentionally  violated  his  duty,  although 
he  does  not  thereby  become  responsible  to  a  human  tribunal,  the 

1  Kypke,  in  his  note  on  Acts  13:  42.  has  proved  this  signification  of  fisza^v, 
by  passages  from  Plutarch  ;  and  Krebs,  by  quotations  from  Josephus.  Comp. 
Schleusner's  Lex.  on  this  word,  No.  3. 

2  Another  explanation  of  the  words  ftsxa^v  aXktjXujv,  is  :  inter  see,  vicissiin, 
alternis  vicibus  (Grotius,  Wetstein) ;  Schott  (vers.  Lat.  N.  T.) ;  sententiae  (de 
pravo  et  honesto)  consuetudine  mutua  utentes. 

3  On  the  import  of  iv^  compare  §  16.  Illust  1.  4  §  86.  Note,  p.  416  etc. 


^  18.]  THE  DIVINE  EXISTENCE.  191 

language  of  his  strong  self-condemnation  will  resemble  the  language 
of  a  judge,  to  whom  he  must  render  an  account  for  that  violation  of 
duty." 


SECTION    XVIII. 


Physico'theological  and  moral  proof  of  the  existence  of  God, — 
The  combination  of  both. 

Although  we  cannot  behold  God  with  our  bodily  eyes,  yet  to  the 
eye  of  our  mind  he  is  by  no  means  invisible,  td  doQara  avxov  voov- 
fieva  aa^ogdrai  the  invisible  things  of  him,  being  understood,  are 
seen ;  for  since  the  creation  of  the  world,  the  invisible  Creator 
stands  revealed  by  his  works,  Rom.  1  :  20.  And  the  farther  we 
advance  in  our  investigations  of  nature,  the  more  numerous  and 
striking  are  the  marks(l)  which  we  discover,  of  system  and  of 
adaptation  to  an  end. (2)  And  there  is  in  fact  no  excuse,  in  the 
sight  of  him  who  has  revealed  himself  to  us  in  the  works  of  nature, 

1  for  the  stubborn  scepticism  which  can  doubt  whether  this  system 
and  adaptation  were  produced  by  the  agency  of  a  rational  and  intel- 
ligent Being,  or  were  the  result  of  a  blind  mechanism,  Rom.  1  :  20, 

i  tig  TO  eivai>  avzovg  dvanoXoyi^Tovg,  comp.  2  Thess.  1  :  8.  For,  al- 
though we  cannot  fully  demonstrate  the  impossibility  of  a  blind  me- 
chanism ;(3)  still  we,  who  are  rational  beings,  and  whose  superiority 
over  other  creatures  consists  chiefly  in  our  reason  and  our  ability  to 
adapt  our  conduct  to  particular  ends,  cannot  possibly  admit,  that  the 
cause  which  produced  the  world  and  gave  us  our  reason,  should 
have  no  semblance  of  rationality,  but  should  be  an  irrational  some- 

I  thing.  Indeed  such  an  admission  would  be  utterly  inconsistent  with 
our  conscious  feeling  of  the  dignity  of  our  own  natures,  Acts  17  : 
28  etc.  Ps.  94 :  8 — 10.  Moreover,  to  admit  the  existence  of  a 
rational  Author  of  the  world  of  which  we  are  a  part,  is  the  more 
consistent  with  our  nature,  because  we  feel  within  us  a  natural  dread 
of  an  invisible  Judge  of  our  actions  and  motives ;  v^^hom  we  must  of 

;  course  believe  to  be  a  rational  Being,  unless  we  are  willing,  in  defi- 
ance of  our  own  consciences,  to  pronounce  that  inward  feeling  which 


I 


192  OF  GOD  [bK.  II. 

leads  us  to  dread  such  a  Judge,  a  delusion.  Now,  as  this  feeling  of 
accountability  unavoidably  leads  us  to  the  idea  that  ive  are  depend- 
ant on  a  rational  Being,  it  would  manifestly  be  in  itself  inexcusable, 
and  would  militate  against  our  own  inward  feelings,  if  we  should 
give  way  to  that  obstinate  unbelief,  which,  instead  of  acknowledg- 
ing a  rational  Being  as  the  great  first  cause  of  all  things,  looks  upon 
the  wise  and  intelligent  constitution  of  nature  as  the  result  of  a  mere 
blind  mechanism.  Reason  in  her  attempts  to  account  for  the  sys- 
tem and  adaptation  of  nature,  is  compelled  'to  admit  the  existence  of 
a  rational  Author  of  creation  ;(4)  and  conscience  compels  us  to  be- 
Heve,  that  we  who  are  a  part  of  this  creation  are  dependant  on  a 
superhuman  rational  Being.  How  then  can  we,  notwithstanding  all 
these  proofs,  and  in  violation  of  the  constitution  of  our  own  minds, (5) 
resist  the  belief  of  a  rational  Author  of  creation,  to  whom  alone  we 
can  refer(6)  those  feelings  of  gratitude  which  arise  within  us  while 
enjoying  the  bounties  of  nature,  and  from  whom  alone  we  can  ex- 
pect those  righteous  retributions  for  our  good  and  bad  actions  which 
our  consciences  lead  us  so  confidently  to  anticipate  ?  (7)  Heb.  11:  6. 
Rom.  2 :  6 — 10.  It  is  also  evident,  that  the  Judge  and  Lord  of 
our  moral  nature,  is  one  and  the  same  Being  with  the  Lord  of  the 
rest  of  creation  ;  (which,  as  is  evinced  by  its  peculiar  and  wise  adapt- 
ation to  such  an  end,  must  have  been  formed  for  the  use  of  rational 
and  moral  beings)  ;(8)  for  otherwise  we  must  suppose  it  possible, 
that  the  arrangements,  in  the  external  world,  might  prevent  our  mor- 
al Judge  (who  on  this  supposition  would  be  distinct  from  the  author 
of  nature)  from  fulfilling  those  promises  and  executing  those  threat- 
enings(9)  which  he  has  made  known  to  us  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  our  consciences.  Moreover,  while  our  nature  strongly 
leads  us  to  desire  happiness,  our  reason  as  strongly  enjoins  obedience 
to  law,  and  teaches,  that  obedience  and  happiness  are  most  intimate- 
ly connected  (<§>  17) ;  but  it  is  impossible  to  conceive,  how  obedience 
can  be  united  with  happiness  in  the  performance  of  duties  which  re- 
quire self-denial, (10)  unless  we  admit  that  the  whole  creation,  as 
well  as  ourselves,  is  under  the  control  of  a  moral  Governor.(ll) 
Therefore,  unless  we  would  be  at  variance  with  ourselves  ;(12)  un- 
less we  would  have  the  inextinguishable  desire  of  our  nature  for  hap- 
piness(13),  frequently  to  be  at   variance  (1  Cor.  15:  32)  with  that 


^18.]  THE  DIVINE  EXISTENCE.  193 

law,  whose  sanctity  and  authority  we  can  never  deny,  except  in  the 
blind  rage  of  passion ;  we  are  compelled  to  admit  that  supposition, 
which  best  accounts  for  our  inward  feelings  of  reverence  for  a  Judge 
of  our  thoughts  and  actions,  and  for  the  order  and  adaptation  visible 
in  the  material  world  ;  in  other  words,  we  must  admit  the  existence 
of  a  moral  Author  and  Governor  of  the  universe.  (14)  And  it  would 
indeed  be  a  great  departure  from  wisdom,  if  we  should  be  so  obsti- 
nate in  our  unbelief  as  to  take  refuge  in  the  groundless  and  absurd 
hypothesis,  "  that  we  are  perhaps  deceived  by  our  nature  and  by 
the  objects  around  us,"(15)  thus  rejecting  the  only  supposition 
which  accords  with  our  nature,  and  with  the  nature  of  the  objects 
that  surround  us. 

Illustration  I. 

The  physico'theological  evidence  is  cumulative. 

The  fact  that  "  the  farther  we  advance  in  our  investigations  of  na- 
ture the  more  numerous  and  striking  are  the  marks  which  we  find 
of  system  and  adaptation  to  an  end,"  justifies  the  expectation,  that 
in  those  cases  where  such  marks  have  not  yet  been  observed,  some 
fijture  day  will  bring  them  to  light.  The  same  fact  also  forcibly  in- 
culcates a  modesty  and  wisdom  that  will  not  at  once  regard  as  prop- 
er grounds  for  skepticism  those  things  in  nature  which  seem  to  be 
inconsistent  with  the  wisdom  of  the  Author  of  creation ;  but  will 
rather,  from  the  acknowledged  perfection  of  the  works  of  creation, 
as  far  as  they  are  known  to  us  infer,  that  equal  excellence  belongs 
to  those  parts  of  the  creation  with  which  we  are  not  yet  well  ac- 
quainted. Hence,  it  is  reasonable,  as  Kant  admits,  to  ascribe  every 
possible  perfection  to  the  Creator  of  the  universe. 

III.  2.     Physico-theological  proof  of  the  divine  existence. 

The  reader  may  consult,  on  this  subject,  the  works  of  Kant,^  Re- 
marus,^  Werenfels,^  and  Dahlenberg.^ 

The  principal  features  of  the  physico-theological   proof,  as  they 

1  Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft,  §  63—67.  p.  275  etc. 

2  Discussion  of  the  principal  truths  of  natural  religion,  6th  edit. 

3  Opuscula,  Pt.  II.  p.  255  etc. 

4  Philosophy  of  relii^ion  and  nature,  3  vols.  1797—98.  And  the  latest  treatise 
on  the  physico-theological  proof,  in  the  work  entitled.  "  Pyrrho  and  Philalethes, 
or  Does  skepticism  lead  to  truth  and  satisfactory  decision  .'"  Sultzbach,  1812. 

25 


194  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

are  briefly  presented  by  Kant,  in  his  "  Critique  on  pure  reason,"* 
are  the  following : 

1.  We  find  every  where  in  our  world,  manifest  marks  of  adapta- 
tion to  specific  ends,  works  executed  with  great  wisdom,  and  form- 
ing a  whole  of  indescribable  multiplicity  as  well  as  of  unbounded 
extent. 

2.  This  systematic  adaptation  of  things  is  not  essential  to  their 
nature  ;  that  is,  if  there  were  no  rational  agent  who  selected,  adapted, 
and  arranged  them,  so  many  different  things  could  not,  by  their  own 
inherent  power,  have  brought  themselves  to  harmonize  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  specific  ends,  as  they  now  do. 

3.  There  exists,  therefore,  one  exalted  and  wise  cause  (or  more 
than  one,)  which  produced  this  world,  not  as  an  omnipotent  nature 
acting  blindly  by  its  generative  fecundity,  but  by  intelligence  and 
volition. 

4.  The  unity  of  this  cause  may  be  inferred  from  the  unity  of 
adaptation  in  the  multifarious  parts  of  the  world,  as  in  the  parts  of  a 
well  planned  edifice.  As  far  as  our  observation  extends,  this  infer- 
ence of  the  unity  of  the  cause,  amounts  to  certainty  ;  and  beyond 
the  sphere  of  our  observation,  the  same  inference  is  derived  with 
probabihty,  from  every  principle  of  analogy. 

III.  3.     Whether  a  blind  mechanism  can  be  proved  impossible. 

Kant  says :  We  must  first  prove  the  impossibility  of  a  unity  of 
object  in  matter,  derived  from  the  mere  mechanical  powers  of  its 
nature,  before  we  can  be  justified  in  ascribing  that  unity  explicitly 
to  something  beyond  nature  as  its  cause.  But  we  can  arrive  at 
nothing  more  than  this  :  that  according  to  our  limited  powers  of 
conception,  and  our  ability  to  judge,  we  can  by  no  means  expect  to 
find  in  mere  matter,  a  principle  or  cause  producing  such  adaptations 
to  specific  ends ;  and  that  to  us,  there  remains  no  other  method  of 
accounting  for  such  a  formation  of  the  material  world,  than  to  refer 
it  to  one  Supreme  Intelligence,  the  cause  of  all  things." 

III.  4.     The  adaptation  in  nature  can  be  explained  only  on  the 
supposition  oj  an  intelligent  cause. 

Compare  Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft,  in  the  passage  above  quoted. 
The  following  passages  also  relate  to  this  subject;  "The  glorious 
order,  beauty,  and  foresight  which  shine  forth  from  every  part  of 
nature,  must,  alone,  have  produced  the  belief  of  a  great  and  wise 
Author  of  creation,  as  far  as  such  belief  rests  on  proofs  from  reason." 


p.  653  etc.  2d  ed. 


*§>  18.]  THE  DIVINE  EXISTENCE.  195 

(Critique  on  pure  Reason,  2d  ed.  preface,  p.  xxxiii.)  And  in  the 
same  work,  p.  651  etc.  "  This  proof  (the  physico-theological) 
deserves  at  all  times  to  be  mentioned  with  respect ;  it  is  the  oldest, 
clearest,  and  best  adapted  to  the  common  sense  of  mankind.  It 
prompts  to  the  study  of  nature,  which  is  its  source,  and  which  con- 
stantly gives  new  force  to  it.  The  attempt  would  therefore  be  no 
less  discouraging  than  fruitless,  to  endeavour  to  detract  from  the 
worth  of  this  proof.  Reason  is  constantly  receiving  new  strength 
and  confidence  from  such  powerful  and,  under  her  hand,  ever 
growing  proofs ;  and  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  any  doubts  of  subtile 
and  abstruse  speculation,  to  depress  her  so  far,  that  she  should  not, 
in  every  instance,  by  a  glance  at  the  wonders  of  nature  and  the 
majesty  of  the  universe,  tear  herself  loose  from  perplexing  indecision, 
as  from  the  phantoms  of  a  dream,  and  rise  in  her  contemplations 
from  greatness  to  greatness,  from  that  which  is  mediate  or  condition- 
al, to  the  immediate  and  uncaused  Author  of  all  things."  And  the 
passage  in  the  work  ;  "  Was  heist,  sich  im  Denken  orientiren  ?" 
(Berlin  Monthly  Publication,  1786:)  "  Unless  we  admit  the  exist- 
ence of  a  rational  Creator,  we  can  assign  no  reason,  or  at  least  no 
intelligible  one,  for  the  system  and  adaptation  which  we  every  where 
find  in  so  wonderful  a  degree,  without  falling  into  direct  inconsisten- 
cies. And  although  we  are  not  able  to  prove  the  impossibility,  that 
such  an  adaptation  should  exist  without  a  rational  first  cause  ;  still 
the  assumption  of  such  impossibility,  is  justified  by  the  fact,  that 
reason  finds  herself  necessitated  to  presuppose  something  which  is 
intelligible  to  her,  in  order  to  explain  these  phenomena ;  as  nothing 
else  can  relieve  her  from  her  embarrassment."  Comp.  Garve's 
Dissert,  above  quoted,  Pt.  7. 

III.  5.  "  Such  is  the  peculiar  constitution  of  our  minds,  that  we 
are  not  able  to  understand  or  form  any  conception  of  the  adaptation 
in  the  objects  in  nature,  in  any  other  manner,  than  by  viewing  them 
and  the  world  in  general  as  the  production  of  a  rational  cause,  that 
is,  of  a  God."i 

III.  6.  "  In  the  moments  when  the  sensibility  of  our  moral 
feehngs  is  most  acute  and  active,  when  we  are  surrounded  by  nature 
arrayed  in  all  her  beauties,  and  feel  the  calm  serene  enjoyment  of 
our  existence  ;  we  feel  within  us  a  conviction  that  we  ought  to  be 
grateful  to  some  being  for  these  blessings."^ 

III.  7.  We  must  either  admit,  that  the  constitution  of  universal 
nature  is  in  harmony  with  the  promises  and  threatenings  of  our 
consciences ;  or  we  are  compelled,  in  direct  opposition  to  the  voice 

1  Kant,  Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft,  §  75.  p.  332  etc. 

2  Kant  sup.  cit.  §  8G,  p.  86.  note,  p.  411.  comp.  §  91,  p.  472. 


196  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

of  conscience,  to  pronounce  that  fear  and  that  hope  which  are  so 
deeply  rooted  in  our  moral  nature,  either  fallacious  or  uncertain.^ — 
On  the  other  hand  it  is  evident,  that  if  the  ultimate  and  chief  object 
of  the  adaptation  in  nature  be  not  a  moral  one,  that  adaptation  can 
have  no  object  at  all.^  It  is  therefore  a  dictate  of  our  nature,  that 
we  and  the  other  objects  in  the  world  are  subject  to  a  moral  Gov- 
ernor. And  tlie  man  who  should  refuse  to  admit  the  existence  of 
a  moral  rational  Ruler  of  the  world,  because  he  is  not  able  to  see 
him  with  his  bodily  eyes,  and  cannot  demonstrate  his  existence  by 
absolute  irresistible  proofs,  but  must  admit  it  by  an  act  of  faith  ; 
would,  to  say  the  least,  act  in  contradiction  to  his  own  moral  nature. 
His  conduct  would  be  just  as  inexcusable,  as  that  of  the  man  who  is 
suffering  the  consequences  of  some  misfortune,  which  he  might  have 
foreseen  and  by  the  use  of  proper  measures  have  obviated,  but  who, 
although  the  evidence  of  his  danger  amounted  to  the  strongest 
probability,  would  not  believe  it,  because  it  did  not  amount  to  abso- 
lute certainty. 

III.  8.  See  Gen.  1:  26  etc.  Matt.  6:  26,  30.  10:  30  etc.  1 
Cor.  3:  21  etc.  Rom'.  8:  19,  21.  These  passages  teach,  that  the 
world  was  created  for  the  sake  of  rational  beings. 

III.  9.     Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft,  ^9\.  p.  457. 

III.  10.  See  Matt.  5:  10  etc.  1  Pet.  3:  14.  2  Thess.  1:  4.  1 
Cor.  15: 30,  31.  All  these  passages  refer  to  such  duties  as  are  con- 
nected with  great  sacrifices. 

III.  U.  See  Matt.  5:  10  etc.  2  Thess.  1:  5—7.  The  retri- 
bution referred  to  in  these  two  passages,  presupposes  a  moral  Gover- 
ner  of  the  world. 

III.  12.  See  Flatt's  "  Contributions  on  the  subject  of  Christian 
doctrines  and  practice,"  No.  II.  in  the  investigation  of  the  question : 
"  What  is  the  relation  in  which  the  hope  of  that  future  happiness 
promised  by  the  Gospel  of  Jesus,  stands  to  virtue,  p.  99  etc.  An- 
notationes  ad  Kantii  philosphicam  de  religione  doctrinam,  <§>  X,  XL 
Magazine  for  Christian  doctrine  etc.  Pt.  7.  p.  93.  and  Pt.  12.  158. 
etc. 

III.  13.  "  To  be  happy,  is  necessarily  the  strong  desire  of 
every  rational  finite  being ;  and  must  therefore  inevitably  have  an 
influence  on  the  determination  of  his  will."  Kant's  Critique  on 
practical  reason,  p.  45.     Comp.  Brastberger,  on  "  The  ground  of 

1  Kant  sup.  cit.  §  87.  p.  414  etc.  42:1,  433. 

2  Crit.  etc.  §  86.  p.  405  etc. 


4>  18.]  THE  DIVINE  EXISTENCE.  197 

our  faith  in  God  and  of  our  knowledge  of  him,"  Stuttgard,  1802. 
Supplement  I.  "  Uber  den  Streit  des  Purismus  und  Eudaemonis- 
mus  in  der  Sittenlehre,"  p.  110  etc. 

III.  14.      We  are  compelled   to  admit  the  existence  of  a  moral 
Governor  of  the  world. 

See  Critique  on  all  Revelation,  «§»  2.  (2d  ed.  <§>  3.)  and  Remarks 
on  Kant's  philosophy  of  religion. 

Compare  Kern,  "  The  doctrine  of  God  according  to  the  princi- 
ples of  the  critical  philosophy,"  Ulm,  1796,  »§»  71  etc.  Staudhn's 
"  Contributions  to  the  philosophy  and  history  of  religion  and  the 
science  of  morals,"  Vol.  III.  No.  2.  ''  On  the  moral  ground  of  the 
critical  philosophy,"  also  Brastberger's  "  Brief  and  plain  view  of 
the  evidence  of  the  existence  of  God,  derived  from  the  concomitance 
of  virtue  and  happiness,"  in  his  treatise  "  On  the  ground  of  our  be- 
lief in  God,"  p.  19 — 48.  To  this  argument  for  the  existence  of 
God  from  the  connexion  between  virtue  and  happiness,  a  notion 
has  of  late  been  opposed,  similar  to  the  ancient  Stoical  idea,  that 
virtue  is  its  own  reward.  Eckermann,  in  the  "  Theologische 
Beitrage,"^  has  attempted  to  show,  that  virtue  always  brings  along 
with  her  a  sufficient  degree  of  contentment.  And  Abicht,  in  the 
"  Doctrine  of  rewards  and  punishments,"^  has  erected  a  theory  of 
rewards  and  punishments,  on  the  principle,  that  the  reward  of  virtue 
is  nothing  else  than  the  pleasure  which  is  connected  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  our  self-acquired  dignity ;  and  that  punishment  is  no- 
thing else  than  the  unpleasant  feelings  resulting  from  the  conscious- 
ness of  our  self-occasioned  degradation.  Compare  what  is  said  in 
refutation  of  this  theory,  and  of  the  inference  which  follows  from  it  ; 
namely,  that  this  idea  of  the  reward  and  punishment  of  virtue  and 
vice,  does  not  necessarily  lead  to  the  belief  of  a  moral  Governor  of 
the  world ;  in  the  "  Examination  of  a  new  theory  of  rewards  and 
punishments,"  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Pt.  2,  No.  VI. 

Another  and  somewhat  different  aspect,  which  has  lately  been 
given  to  this  moral  evidence  of  the  existence  of  God,  is  this:  If  we 
would  expect  to  realize  that  happiness  which  our  conscience  (or  our 
reason)  leads  us  to  anticipate,  then  we  must  believe  in  a  moral  Gov- 
ernor of  the  world,  that  is,  in  a  God.  Schmidt  (in  his  "  Elements  of 
christian  doctrine,"  Giesen,  1800)  grounds  the  belief  of  the  exist- 
ence of  God  {^  39  etc.)  and  of  religion  in  general  («§>  1  etc.),  on  the 
requisitions  of  conscience,  or  the  moral  principle.  "  In  that  course 
of  moral  conduct  which  conscience  demands,  obstacles  present  them- 
selves which  our  power  is  unable  to  surmount.     If  then  they  are  to 

1  Vol.  III.  Pt.  I.  p.  82  etc.  2  Erlangen,  1796,  Pt.  I.  ' 


198  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

be  surmounted,  we  must  admit  the  existence  of  a  power,  which  so 
arranges  things  that  these  impediments  shall  infallibly  be  overcome  ; 
that  is,  we  must  admit  the  existence  of  a  moral  Author  and  Gov- 
ernor of  the  world,  a  God. 

Fichte  does  indeed,  set  out  with  the  same  principle :  that  for  the 
success  of  virtue,  we  must  look  to  an  active,  rational  being  ;  but  in 
his  reasoning,  he  admits  only  a  moral  constitution  of  the  world, 
without  referring  this  constitution  to  a  moral  Governor, 

Forberg  builds  his  sceptical  atheism  on  the  principle,  "  that  reli- 
gion, as  far  as  attention  to  it  can  be  a  duty,  consists  merely  in  con- 
ducting ourselves  as  if  there  were  a  moral  government  and  a  moral 
Governor  of  the  world  ;  but,  that  there  really  is  a  moral  constitu- 
tion of  the  world  and  a  God,  we  may  believe  or  not,  as  we  please  ; 
for  it  cannot  be  ascertained."  Compare  what  is  said  against  this 
theory,  in  the  Letters  on  Kant's,  Forberg's,  and  Fichte's  theory  of 
Religion,  above  referred  to  ;  and  the  Review  of  Forberg's  Apolo- 
gy, in  "  Tiibingen  Gelehrten  Anz."  1800,  Pt.  42—44. 

III.  15.  See  Brastberger's  "  Investigation  of  Kant's  Critique  on 
pure  reason," — and  "  On  Kant's  Critique  upon  practical  reason," 
especially  p.  212 — 219.  "  On  the  ground  of  our  belief  in  God 
and  of  our  knowledge  of  him,"  p.  84 — 99,  where  the  subjective  ne- 
cessity of  believing  in  the  existence  of  a  God,  is  fully  discussed,  and 
derived  from  several  proofs  founded  in  our  nature.  (On  this  subjec- 
tive necessity,  Vogel  rests  his  "  Theoretico-practical  proof  of  the 
objective  existence  of  God,"  in  Gabler's  '*  New  Theol.  Journal," 
Vol.  15.  p.  19  etc.  109  etc.)  In  the  last  mentioned  work  of  Brast- 
berger,  (p.  92 — 94,  note),  the  result  of  his  investigation  is  given, 
in  the  following  passage  :  "  We  find  ourselves  and  every  thing 
around  us,  to  the  utmost  extent  of  our  observation,  standing  in  such 
numerous  relations  and  references  to  each  other,  and  in  such  a  co- 
herent systematic  connexion,  that  the  idea  of  an  intentional  adapta- 
tion to  rational  purposes,  according  to  universal  laws,  or  of  a  physi- 
cal and  moral  world,  is  irresistibly  forced  upon  us.  But  the  exist- 
ence of  such  an  order  of  things,  we  can  rationally  ascribe  only  to  an 
intelligence  which  superintends  and  arranges  all  things  and  events, 
to  a  rational  mind  which  selects  and  acts  with  an  intelligent  refer- 
ence to  ends.  Consequently,  we  must  suppose  the  primary  and 
absolute  cause  of  all  things  to  be  a  rational  and  moral  Intelligence. 
— Although  this  reasoning  proves  only  the  necessity  of  our  conceiv- 
ing the  idea  of  a  God,  and  of  our  supposing  that  he  really  exists, 
(for  no  proof  can  possibly  establish  the  necessity  of  the  existence  of 
a  thing  itself,  but  only  the  necessity  of  our  believing  and  conceiving 
it  to  exist),  still  it  is  perfectly  satisfactory.  It  perfectly  justifies  us 
in  entertaining  a  rational  belief  in  a  God  ;  for  we  are  brought  to  this 


•^  18.]  THE  DIVINE  EXISTENCE.  199 

alternative  :  we  must  either  believe  there  is  a  God  ;  or  we  must  be- 
lieve, that  every  thing  of  which  we  have  any  knowledge,  even  we 
ourselves  and  all  our  thoughts,  conceptions,  and  existence,  are  emp- 
ty, incomprehensible  legerdemain  ;  in  truth,  a  nothing  floating  about 
in  the  bottomless  profundity  of  nothing'^ ! ! 

Vogel,  in  his  Theoretico-practical  evidence  of  the  objective  exist- 
ence of  God,^  advances  this  idea :  "  Man  is  compelled  by  a  sub- 
jective, theoretical  and  practical  necessity  of  his  reason,  to  assert 
the  objective  existence  of  God  ;  and  of  this  objective  existence  of 
God,  he  is  as  certain  as  of  the  existence  of  those  objects  which  he 
perceives  through  his  senses  ;  for  he  has  the  same  evidence  for  the 
existence  of  both  ;  namely,  that  his  reason  is  compelled  [by  a  sub- 
jective necessity]  to  believe  it ;  and  this  must  ever  be  his  only  cri- 
terion of  truth." 

Siiskind,  in  his  dissertation  "  On  the  evidence  of  the  existence  of 
God,  as  a  self-existent  Intelligence,  distinct  from  the  world,"  gives 
a  similar  derivation  of  our  belief  in  the  existence  of  God.^  The 
general  tenour  of  his  reasoning  is  as  follows  :  "  To  take  it  for  gran- 
ted, that  we  are  not  deceived  by  our  reason  ;  is  indeed  an  assump- 
tion, the  truth  of  which  we  cannot  prove  ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  it 
is  one  which,  as  rational  beings,  we  must  necessarily  make.  The 
plain  dictates  of  reason,  that  is,  those  dictates  which  originate  from 
the  essential  nature  and  activity  of  our  reason,  are  therefore,  of  in- 
disputable certainty  and  truth.  And  their  validity  extends,  not  on- 
ly to  the  appearances  of  things,  but  also  to  the  things  themselves 
to  which  these  appearances  refer ;  nay,  it  extends  even  to  things 
which  are  not  objects  of  sense  ;  so  far  as  the  general  and  essential 
principles  of  reason  oblige  us  to  form  judgments  concerning  them 
or  to  bring  them  under  our  consideration.  To  attempt  to  prove, 
that  the  laws  of  our  reason  are  not  applicable  to  things  themselves, 
would  be  an  attempt  to  prove,  that  we  are  deluded  by  reason  :  the 
attempt  itself,  -therefore,  would  involve  a  self-contradiction  ;  for  the 
proof  would  have  to  be  conducted  by  the  aid  of  reason,  and  would 
necessarily  presuppose  that  very  validity  of  reason,  which  it  was  in- 
tended to  overthrow.  To  these  pure  dictates  of  reason,  belong 
those  of  a  theoretical,  as  well  as  those  of  a  practical  nature.  The 
former  include  the  principles  of  unity  and  of  contradiction,  the  prin- 
ciples of  causality  and  adaptation,  viz.  that  the  chain  of  depedencies 
must  have  an  absolute  first  cause,  and  the  principle,  that  every  thing 
which  exists  is  either  substance  or  accident.     The  latter  include 

1  In  Gabler's  New  Theologr.  Journal  for  1799,  Vol.  I.  p.  19—34,  109—154,  and 
in  that  for  1800,  Vol.  II.  p.  17—54. 

2  Magazine  far  Christliche    Dogmatik  und    Moral,  Stuck   12.  5   XXIII— 
XXXVl'II,  and  §  XLVII-LVIII. 


200  OP  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

those  principles  in  all  men,  according  to  which  reason  determines 
what  is  unconditionally  good.  It  would  be  inconsistent,  to  acknowl- 
edge the  validity  of  the  latter  only,  while  we  doubt  or  deny  that  of  the 
former  ;  for  it  is  the  same  reason,  which  in  the  one  case  determines 
what  is  good,  and  in  the  other,  what  is  true.  It  is  therefore  impos- 
sible to  have  a  consistent  (i.  e.  a  rational)  belief  of  the  validity  of 
the  practical  principles  of  reason,  without  also  admitting  the  validi- 
ty of  its  theoretical  dictates.  But  it  is  on  these  theoretical  and 
practical  principles  of  reason,  which  are  also  decisive  for  the  actual 
existence  of  ourselves  and  of  the  visible  world,  that  the  rational  be- 
lief of  a  God,  as  a  self-existent  Intelligence,  distinct  from  the  world, 
as  an  intelligent  and  holy  Author  of  the  world,  is  founded. 

Note.     On  a  late  pantheistic  hypothesis  concerning  God. 

The  doctrine  concerning  God,  taught  in  the  System  of  absolute 
identity,  is  inculcated  and  explained  by  its  author,  in  the  following 
works :  Schelling's  "  Bruno ;  or  On  the  divine  and  natural  first 
principle  of  things,"  "  Magazine  for  Speculative  Physics,"  "  New 
Magazine  for  Speculative  Physics,"  "  Lectures  on  the  course  of 
Academic  Study,"  "  Philosophy  and  Religion,"  "  A  view  of  the 
true  relation  of  the  philosophy  of  nature  to  the  improved  doctrines 
of  Fichte,"  "  Philosophical  investigations  relative  to  the  freedom  of 
man,  and  the  subjects  connected  with  it,"  "  Denkmal  der  Schrift 
von  den  gottlichen  Dingen  des  Herrn  Friedrich  Heinrich  Jacobi." 

Agreeably  to  the  representation  of  the  last  two  works,  God  is 
that  being  which  evolved  itself  out  of  a  principle  or  ground  of  ex- 
istence found  in  God  himself,  (out  of  a  nature  in  God),  or  out  of  a 
principle,  which  is  indeed  not  intelligent,  not  moral,  not  perfect,  in 
itself,  but  which  nevertheless  contains  in  embryo  and  locked  up 
within  itself,  intelligence,  morality,  and  perfection  (which,  however, 
are  only  potentia,  only  implicite  intelligent  and  moral  and  perfect) ; 
by  means  of  a  series  of  creations  (self-manifestations  of  God),  by 
which  nature  was  exalted  and  spiritualized,  until  it  evolved  itself  in- 
to the  most  perfect  personal  Being  (Deus  explicitus,  Deus  sensu 
eminenti) :  or,  God  is  the  absolute  identity  of  the  ideal  and  the  real, 
evolving  itse\(  from  the  original  absolute  confusion  of  the  ideal  and 
real.  This  absolute  confusion,  the  original  ground  itself,  is  neither 
ideal  nor  real ;  yet  divides  itself  into  two  equally  eternal  principles 
of  the  ideal  and  real ;  and  out  of  the  combination  of  both  (by  means 
of  the  subordination  of  the  real  to  the  ideal,  by  the  transmutation  of 
the  real  into  the  ideal),  arises  absolute  identity,  that  is,  God. 

The  principal  objections  to  this  doctrine  concerning  God,  are  the 
following : 

1.  Tliis  theory  does  not  account  for  the  existence  of  God.  2. 
This  theory  does  not  render  the  existence  of  God,  in  the  least  de- 


^  18.]  THE  DIVINE  EXISTENCE.  201 

gree,  more  comprehensible  or  intelligible  than  the  common  one, 
which  supposes  him  to  have  existed  as  an  all-perfect  Being,  from 
the  beginning.  3.  This  hypothesis  forces  our  idea  of  God,  (which 
is  absolute),  into  forms  ;  and  subjects  it  to  laws  which  can  apply- 
only  to  finite  things,  to  the  visible  world.  God  is  considered  to  be 
of  the  same  essence  as  the  material  world.  4.  It  really  subjects 
God,  during  his  self-manifestations,  to  the  power  of  a  supreme  fate, 
of  an  original  supreme  and  self-existent  law.  5.  The  assertion, 
that  God  could  not,  from  the  beginning,  exist  as  an  all-perfect  Be- 
ing, cannot  be  proved.     It  is  founded  on 

(a)  The  general  principle,  that  the  less  perfect  cannot  proceed 
from  the  more  perfect ;  but  vice  versa,  the  latter  from  the  former 
(non  fumus  ex  fulgore,  sed  fulgor  ex  fumo).  But  even  if  this  were 
a  universal  law  of  nature,  it  could  not  on  that  account  be  applied  to 
the  relation  of  the  Creator  to  the  world,  (b)  Upon  this  principle  : 
"  Had  God,  from  the  beginning,  actually  been  possessed  of  the 
highest  degree  of  perfection,  as  he  could  not  attain  a  higher  degree 
of  excellence,  he  would  have  had  no  reason  for  creating  and  bring- 
ing into  existence  such  a  multitude  of  objects,  by  which  he  could 
only  have  been  rendered  less  perfect."  But  agreeably  to  the  asser- 
tion of  the  author  of  this  system  himself,  love  is  the  ground  or  rea- 
son of  the  creation  of  the  world  ;  and  to  create  it,  was  condescen- 
sion in  God.  This  accords  equally  well  with  the  common  opinion, 
that  God  existed  from  the  beginning  as  the  all-perfect  Being.  Nor 
could  he,  by  creating  the  world,  suffer  any  diminution  of  his  perfec- 
tion ;  provided  we  consider  creation  as  an  incomprehensible  act  of 
the  omnipotence  of  God,  and  unattended  by  any  communication  of 
his  essence  to  the  creatures. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  hypothesis,  that  from  a  principle  which  is 
in  itself  not  moral  and  not  intelligent,  God  evolves  himself  into  the 
most  perfect  Being  ;  is  encumbered  with  insuperable  difficulties  and 
objections. 

(a)  If  God  has  exalted  himself  into  the  most  perfect  Being,  only 
at  the  end  of  time ;  then  neither  the  creation  nor  the  government 
of  the  world  is  the  work  of  perfect  wisdom,  goodness,  and  holiness, 
(b)  This  evolution  of  God  would  be  an  evolution  from  finite  into 
infinite  ;  and  yet  finite  and  infinite  are  toto  genere  different. 

6.  The  immanence  of  all  things  in  God,  which  is  asserted  by 
this  hypothesis,  destroys  the  individuality  and  substantiality  of  the 
creatures  ;  contradicts  what  we  know  tQ  be  a  fact,  that  distinct  sub- 
stances exist  together  in  the  world  ;  and  leads  to  the  identification 
and  confounding  of  the  creature  with  the  Creator.  The  idea  of  an 
absolute,  an  independant  first  cause  of  the  world,  is  the  ultimate 
conception  of  our  minds  ;  and  in  this  alone  can  the  eternal  unity  of 
all  things  be  imagined.  {In  and  by  must  be  distinguished  with  care, 
26 


202  OF  GOD.  [bk.  II, 

if  we  would  express  our  idea  of  Deity  with  precision.)  7.  This 
system  destroys  the  freedom  of  the  will  of  man ;  for  freedom  cannot 
consist  with  this  immanence  in  God ;  8.  And  thereby  it  destroys 
the  distinction  between  moral  good  and  evil. 


SECTION  XIX 


The  evidence  of  divine  existence,  corroborated  by  the  miracles  of 

Christ. 

The  method  above  stated,  for  arriving  at  a  conviction  of  the  ex- 
istence of  God,  is  of  such  a  nature,  that  it  would  not  be  strange,  if 
God  should,  by  other  clear  and  striking  proofs,  facilitate(l)  that  ev- 
olution of  our  finer  moral  feelings  which  is  presupposed  in  that 
method.     Such  proofs  we  actually  have  in  the  miracles(2)  of  Jesus 
and  his  apostles,(3)  the  truth  and  importance  of  which  have  already 
been  established,  ^  5, 8,  10  at  the  end.     Those  miracles  were  such 
effects  as  human  agents  could  never  have  produced,  by  their  own 
intelligence  and   power  ;  and  therefore  necessarily  presuppose  an 
invisible  cause.     And  this  invisible  cause  must  have  been  rational ; 
for  not  only  are  we  ourselves  able  to  discover(4)  certain  objects  for 
which  they  were  wrought,  but  the  history  of  them,  and  the  express 
declarations  of  those  who  performed  them,  assign  to  them  definite 
objects. (5)     Now,  according  to  the  declaration  of  Jesus  and  his 
apostles,  that  rational  Cause,  whose  superhuman  power  is  proved 
from  the  very  nature  of  these  miracles,(6)  was  God,  or  the  Creator 
and  Lord  of  nature.     (For,  this  is  the  description  of  the  divine  char- 
acter which  Jesus  and  his  apostles  give,  deriving  it  from  the  Old 
Testament,  the  authority  of  which  they  acknowledged,  see  <§>  20) , 
And  we  have  no  reason  to  look  for  any  other  cause  of  those  mira- 
cles, different  from  that  assigned  by  Jesus  and  his  apostles  ;  espe- 
cially as  the  arguments  which  have  been  adduced  (*§>18)  for  our  be- 
lief in  the  existence  of  God,  render  their  declarations  credible.     God 
has  then,  in  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  manifested  his 
agency   (Acts  14:  9 — 11.    Comp.  v.  15),  and   corroborated   the 


^  19.]  DIVINE  EXISTENCE  PROVED  BY  MIRACLES.  203 

Other  proofs  of  his  existence  (v.  17).  This  proof  of  the  divine 
existence,  taken  in  connexion  with  that  above  stated  (<§>  18),  would 
not  be  wholly  divested  of  force,  even  if  we  were  to  admit  the  unau- 
thorized supposition,  that  the  miracles  of  Christ  and  his  apostles 
were  wrought  by  some  other  being.  For,  on  this  supposition,  we 
should  have  to  admit,  that  the  other  being,  who  must  necessarily 
have  been  rational  and  superhuman,  did  himself  ascribe  the  mira- 
cles and  doctrines  of  Christ  and  his  apostles  (§  8,  6)  to  the  Creator 
and  Lord  of  nature.  In  this  case,  then,  a  belief  in  the  existence  of 
God,  would  be  supported,  by  the  testimony  of  at  least  one  superhu- 
man being,  and  would  no  longer  be  a  weakness  peculiar  to  man. 

Illustration  1. 

Koppen,  in  "  The  Bible  a  work  of  divine  wisdom,"  proves,  that 
the  revelation  which  God  has  given  us  in  nature,  by  no  means 
renders  a  supernatural  revelation  of  his  invisible  greatness  and  pow- 
er superfluous. 

III.  2.  On  this  evidence  for  the  existence  of  God,  see  Michaelis, 
"  Dogmatik  ;"  and  in  Flatt's  Beitrage,^  "  Remarks  on  the  proof  for 
the  existence  of  God,  derived  from  the  Bible,  and  especially  from 
the  doctrines  and  history  of  Jesus." 

On  the  question,  "  Are  proofs  of  the  objective  existence  of  God 
necessary,  in  popular  and  practical  religious  instruction,"  see 
Bauer's  Dissertation  in  Flatt's  Magazine.^ 

III.  3.     The  existence  of  God  proved  by  miracles. 

We  have  in  this  case  selected  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his 
apostles,  as  the  ground  of  evidence,  because  the  truth  of  the  Old 
Testament  miracles  is  to  be  proved  by  the  authority  of  Jesus  and 
his  apostles.^  But  if  we  contemplate  more  attentively,  the  grounds 
for  belief  in  the  existence  of  a  God,  which  our  own  nature  contains  ; 
we  shall  not  view  as  superfluous,  the  fact  stated  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, that  God  himself,  by  his  immediate  influence,  and  in  various 
ways,  did  awaken  and  cherish  and  strengthen,  not  only  in  the  first 
persons  of  our  race,  but  also  in  their  descendants,  those  nobler  feel- 
ings, which  produce  a  belief  in  the  existence  of  God  as  the  supreme 
rewarder  of  all  good.'^  In  this  manner  God  actually  instructed  some 
individuals,  who  were  to  instruct  others,  in  the  knowledge  of  his 

1  Num.  1.  p.  7  etc.  2  Pt.  VI.  No.  V.  3  See  §  13. 

4  Heb.  11:  6. 


204  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

character  as  creator^  of  the  world,  and  of  the  necessity  of  obedience 
to  him  in  order  to  the  enjoyment  of  happiness.^  Examples  of  this 
are  found  in  Gen.  2:  17.  3:  8  etc.  4:  6  etc.  6:  3.  15:  1.  17:  1. 
By  their  own  experience  of  the  fulfilment  of  his  promises  and  threats, 
he  habituated  them  to  a  belief  in  him.^  Such  were  the  promise 
made  to  Abraham  of  a  numerous  posterity,"*  the  promise  of  the  land 
of  Canaan,^  the  threatening  of  a  flood  and  its  fulfilment.^  By  the 
public  miracles,  which  God  wrought  among  the  Israelites  and  the 
people  around  them,  he  made  it  evident,  to  those  who  saw  and 
heard  those  miracles,  that  there  was  an  invisible  Lord  of  creation,"^ 
who  was  able  to  execute  the  promises  and  denunciations  of  their 
own  consciences.^  See  the  declarations  of  God  relative  to  such 
miracles,  in  Exod.  7:  5.  8:  6,  18.  9:  14.  Deut.  4:  32-— 39.  Dan. 
ch.  2—6.  Ex.  9:  16.  Josh.  2:  11.  4:  23,  24.  Facts,  therefore, 
were  the  means  by  which  that  belief  in  the  existence  of  God,  as  the 
Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  world,  to  which  even  our  own  nature 
urges  us,  was  anciently  confirmed.  And  although  these  miracles 
were  not  witnessed  by  all  men,  nor  indeed  could  be,  without  im- 
pairing their  force,  still  the  knowledge  of  them  was  transmitted  by 
tradition  to  succeeding  generations,^  and  in  various  ways  was  also 
spread  among  foreign  nations.^^  ("  For,"  says  Koppen,  if  such 
extraordinary  acts  were  performed  amongst  aM  nations,  and  at  all 
times,  or  if  they  were  only  frequently  repeated ;  it  would  become 
matter  of  doubt,  whether  they  were  not  the  natural  effects  of  some 
hidden  powers  of  nature.  They  w^ould  become  common  and  fa- 
miliar, like  the  ordinary  phenomena  of  nature,  and  thus  would  make 
little  impression  ;  and  by  this  means  the  object  of  them  would  be 
frustrated,  and  they  would  be  no  proofs  of  a  revelation  from  God.") 
Now  these  miracles  might  contribute  much  to  promote  the  knowl- 
edge of  God,  even  among  those  who  had  heard  only  vague  rumours 
of  them,  or  had  even  not  heard  of  them  at  all.  For  the  idea  of  a 
God,  which  these  numerous  manifestations  of  divine  agency  impart- 
ed to  the  eye-witnesses  of  these  divine  acts,  was  through  them  com- 
municated to  other  families  or  nations  with  whom  they  came  in 
contact,  and  thus  was  brought  into  general  circulation.  And  as  soon 
as  the  idea  of  a  God  has  been  communicated  to  a  person  from  with- 
out, all  the  declarations  of  his  own  conscience  and  the  instructions 
of  nature  around  him,  become,  even  without  any  new  external 
proofs  of  the  divine    existence,  much  more  comprehensible  and 


1  Gen.  ch.  1.  2  Gen.  18:  19. 

3  Heb.  11:  1,  2,  7—19.  4  Gen.  15:  4— G.  17:  15  etc.  compare  ch.  21. 

5  Gen.  15:  7  etc.  Exod.  3:  6  etc.  6:  2—8.  6  Gen.  6:  7. 

■^  Exod.  9:  29.      8  gee  Koppen  sup.  cit.  Ft.  II.  p.  180  etc   ^2d  ed.  p.  194  etc.) 
9  Exod.  10:  2.  0  See  e.  ■'.  2  K.  5:  2-15. 


^  19.]  DIVINE  EXISTENCE  PROVED  BY  MIRACLES.  205 

efficient.^  Nor  can  we  doubt  that  God,  whose  providence  extends 
to  the  times  and  the  places  of  habitation  of  all  men,^  would  cause 
that  those  who  had  a  more  perfect  knowledge  of  him,  should  be 
brought  into  connexion  with  others  of  humbler  attainments,  so  that 
the  latter  might  have  an  opportunity  to  '*  seek  the  Lord,"  Cv^hv 
TOP  d-eov,  Acts  17:  27.  For  although  God,  the  source  of  all  good, 
has  revealed  himself  to  the  heathen  in  external  and  internal  nature, 
{ovx  oLfjiaQtvQOv  iavTOv  difrj^fv,  Acts  14:  17. — ov  ^iccxgdv  and  tvog 
ixdoTov  T^f-mv  vndgyetj  Acts  17:  27  ;)  still  they  have  only  obscure 
views  and  conjectures  respecting  a  beneficent  Creator  of  nature, 
and  a  righteous  Judge ;  and  these  views  need  to  be  evolved  by  clear 
and  distinct  instructions,  derived  from  God,  through  the  medium  of 
persons  resident  either  amongst  them  or  in  their  vicinity.  Thus 
might  the  Athenians,^  prior  to  the  arrival  of  the  apostle  Paul,  have 
sought  instruction  on  religious  subjects  from  the  Jews,  who  under 
the  dominion  of  the  Romans,  everywhere  enjoyed  religious  liberty  ; 
and  thus  did  they  in  fact  partially  receive  it.^  I  here  pass  over  the 
earlier  migrations  of  the  Jews,  voluntary  or  forced,  the  wanderings 
of  the  ancient  worshippers  of  God  ;  and  the  more  recent  travels  of 
Christians,  all  of  whom  have  had  various  intercourse  with  the  hea- 
then. 

III.  4.  That  all  nature  harmoniously  tends  to  effect  certain 
ends,  and  was  purposely  adapted  to  these  ends  by  its  Creator,  is 
not  a  fact  which  is  the  subject  of  immediate  observation ;  but  it  is  a 
rational  supposition,  which  we  take  for  granted.^ 

III.  5.  Compare  the  "  Weinachtsprogramm"  of  1788,  on  1 
Tim.  3:  16,  p.  16.^ 

III.  6.  It  is  evident  from  the  nature  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
and  his  apostles  (^  8,)  and  from  the  moral  character  of  the  doctrines 
which  were  established  by  them,  that  the  cause  from  which  they 
proceeded  must  have  been  a  Being  possessed  not  only  of  very  su- 
perior intelligence  and  power,  but  also  of  beneficence  and  love  of 
virtue.  Compare  Flatt's  "  Contributions  to  the  science  of  christian 
doctrines  and  practice,"  p.  38,  39,  43  etc. 

1  Ps:  19:  2—4.  2  Acts  17:  26. 

3  Acts  ch.  17.  4  Acts  17:  17. 

5  See  Kant's  Critik  der  Urtheilskraft,  §  75.  p.  3:^2. 

6  See  also  John  11:  41.  14:  10.  10:  32,  37.  5:  17—30,  36.  17:  1—5.  Acts  2:  32 
—36.    And  §  8.  must.  2.  §  10.  lUust.  25—27. 


i 


206  OF  GOD.  [bK.  11. 

SECTION   XX. 

God  is  the  Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  world. 

The  scriptural  representation  of  God,  whose  existence  has  been 
proved  (<§>  17 — 19),  is,  that  he  is  the  Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  world. 
Jer.  10:  10—16,  (v.  12,  "jn^J^tia  b^n  )^:d^^  ini^Di  ynN  nizis? 
tJ^auJ  nc:2  in:^nnnT  who  made  the  earth  by  his  power,  he  founded 
the  world  by  his  wisdom,  and  by  his  intelligence  he  stretched  out 
the  heavens,  v.  16,  N=in  bbn  ni^T"^  he  is  the  former  of  all  things. 
Psalm  96:  5.  146:  6,  t33— T^N-^s-nfi^-i  Q^ri-ni^  y^N]  a-^^uj  r5iy> 
he  who  made  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that  is  in 
them.  Is.  42:  5.  44:  24.  45:  12,  18.  66:  2,  Matt.  19:  4,  6  noiv- 
aag^  an  agxv?  the  Creator,  in  the  beginning,  ch.  11:  25,  xvgtog  lov 
ovQuvov  ital  xrjg  y^g  Lord  of  heaven  and  of  earth.  Acts  14:  15, 
-O^eog  ^o)v,  bg  tnoiriae  tov  ovgavov  xat  ifjv  yrjv,  xal  xriv  d^aXaaaav,  ncct 
navxa  id  iv  avxolg  the  living  God,  who  made  the  heaven  and  the 
earth,  and  the  sea,  and  all  things  which  are  in  them.  Acts  17:  24. 
Rom.  1:  19,  20,  25.  11:  36,  i|  aviov^  xat  dv  avxov,  xal  tig  avrov  td 
ndvTu  of  him,  and  by  him,  and  to  him  are  all  things.  1  Cor.  8:  5,  6, 
£jg  ^eog,  i^  ov  id  ndvxa  one  God,  from  whom  are  all  things  :  comp. 
Heb.  2:  10.  Rev.  4:  11,  ou  ixztaag  xd  ndvxa,  nal  dcd  x6  d^ilrifid 
oov  ^aav,  xalixxia&j]Gav  thou  didst  create  all  things,  and  by  thy  will 
they  were  created.  Rev.  10:  6.  14:  7. 


Illu 


STRATION. 


*In  the  parallel  passage  of  Mark  (10:  6),  6  S^eog  God,  is  used 
instead  of  o  nonqaag  the  Creator  or  He  who  made.  Losner,  in  his 
Annotations  on  Matt.  19:  4,  adduces  a  passage  from  Philo,  (De 
Opificio  mundi,)  in  which  God  is  called  6  noiMv,  and  others,  in 
which  he  is  termed  o  yevvrjoag. 


SECTION    XXI 


The  poiver  of  God. 

From  the  greatness  of  the  universe^  a  part  of  which  surrounds  us, 
and  of  which  we  ourselves  constitute  a  part,  we  infer  the  great  pow- 


<^  21.]  POWER  OF  GOD.  207 

er(l)  of  its  invisible  Author.  Rom.  1:  20.  Jer.  27:  5.  51:  15.  Is. 
40:  26.  Ps.  147:  5.  Job  40:  9.  ch.  41.  It  is  evident,  that  the 
povs^er  of  God  is  able  to  produce  effects  in  the  universe(2),  which 
the  course  of  events  and  the  agency  of  natural  causes  can  never  be 
expected  to  accomphsh.  For  the  course  of  events  and  the  agency 
of  natural  causes,  frequently  fail  to  make  happiness  attendant  on  vir- 
tue in  the  life  of  individuals ;  and  yet  reason  and  conscience  justify 
the  expectation (3),  that  God  will  complete  this  harmony  or  coinci- 
dence of  happiness  and  virtue,  in  the  most  perfect  manner(4).  The 
facts,  by  which  this  omnipotent  influence  of  God  on  nature  is  prov- 
ed, are  the  miracles  recorded  in  Scripture  ;  of  which(5)  we  shall 
here  adduce  as  evidence,  (comp.  <§>  19.  Illustration  3)  only  those 
which  were  wrought  in  the  life  time  of  Jesus  and  in  the  period  im- 
mediately subsequent. 

Illustration  1. 

Kant,  in  his  "  Critik  der  Urtheilskraft,"  (§  91,  85.  p.  469  etc. 
395),  remarks,  that  the  physico-theological  proof,  strictly  considered, 
would  indeed  prove  that  the  Author  of  nature  is  very  powerful,  but 
not  that  he  is  omnipotent ;  because  our  utmost  knowledge  of  the 
world,  is  only  a  partial  knowledge  of  the  whole.  Compare  his 
"  Critique  on  practical  reason,"  p.  251. 

III.  2.  Luke  1:  34 — 37,  ovx  ccduvarov  nagcc  zm  {^sm  nav  Qtjfia 
nothing  is  impossible  with  God.  Gen.  18:  11 — 14,  ti'^rt'^y^  J<bD';n 
^n^i  is  any  thing  impossible  to  Jehovah  ?  Rom.  4:  18,  21',  o  inrjy- 
yeXzai,  {sc.  d  &€6g,)dvvuiQg  ioTixal  noi^fjaai^  he  who  promised,  sc, 
God,  is  able  also  to  perform.  Zech.  8:  6. 

III.  3.  See  Kant's  "  Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft,"  <§>  86.  note.  <§> 
88.  and^  17,  18  of  this  work. 

III.  4.  If  this  expectation  does  not  necessarily  suppose  the  om- 
nipotence of  God,  and  if  we  therefore  cannot  agree  with  Kant, 
"  that  the  supreme  Being  must  be  supposed  omnipotent,  in  order 
that  he  may  adapt  universal  nature  to  the  highest  moral  purposes ;" 
still  it  leads  us  to  the  idea,  that  the  power  of  God  is  very  great  and 
transcends  all  our  conceptions.  Eph.  3:  20,  6  dwa^evog  xmeg  navxa 
noirioav  uneQanntgiGoov  tj  voov^ev  he  that  is  able  to  do  abundantly 
more  than  we  can  comprehend.  Ps.  145:  3.  See  Flatt's  "  Letters  on 
the  moral  evidence  of  the  existence  of  God,"  p.  74  etc. 

III.  5.     These  miracles  are  regarded  in  the  New  Testament,  as 


208  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

proofs  of  the  divine  power.  John  11:4,  40,  do^a  tov  '&eov  the  glory 
of  God.  Ephes.  1:  19,  20.  Acts  10:  38.  Comp.  Luke  9:  43.  5:  17. 
So  also  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament,  Exod.  9:  16. 
15:  6,  7,  11,  12.  Deut.  11:  2  etc.  Ps.  77:  14  etc.  135:  5,  and  es- 
pecially V.  9.  Koppen,  in  the  work  above  quoted,  Pt.  I.  p.  180  etc. 
(2d  ed.  p.  215),  gives  a  general  view  of  all  the  scriptural  miracles, 
considered  as  revelations  of  the  glory  of  God.  The  Scriptures  com- 
bine the  evidence  of  the  divine  power,  which  is  derived  from  the 
two  sources,  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  the  miracles.  Ps.  136: 
4  etc.  Jer.  32:  17,  19,  20. 


SECTION  XXII 


The  intellectual  character  of  God. 

The  incomprehensible(l)  greatness  of  the  divine  intelligence,  ap- 
pears from  the  wise  adaptation  of  the  world  to  great  and  exalted 
ends(2)  Psalm  104:  24.  147:  4  etc.  Is.  40:  28,  inr^nn^  'ij'ph  px 
his  intelligence  is  incomprehensible.  Prov.  3:  19,  20.  Jer.  51:  15. 
And  as  God  is  the  Author  of  creation,  he  must  be  most  perfectly 
acquainted  with  it  (Is.  29:  16.  Ps.  33:  15) ;  and  nothing  however 
minute(3)  or  recondite,(4)  can  be  unknown  to  him. (5)  This  we 
must  necessarily  admit,(6)  if  our  expectation  be  well  founded  :(7) 
that  he  will  hereafter  execute  the  sentence  which  conscience  pro- 
nounces upon  us,  (Rom.  2:  15,  16.  comp.  <§>  17.)  For,  how  could 
he  be  a  competent  judge,  if  he  had  not  the  most  minute  acquaint- 
ance with  the  whole  life  of  every  individual,  as  well  as  with  the  state 
of  his  heart,(8)  and  indeed  with  all  the  outward  circumstances  in 
which  he  was  placed  ?  For  such  knowledge  is  absolutely  necessary, 
to  form  a  correct  estimate  of  the  moral  worth  of  any  individual. 
The  annunciation  of  a  future  judgment  (comp.  <§>  24.  Illust.  8.  <§> 

17.  No.  4)  implies,  that  God  has  already  determined  what  he  will 
hereafter  do.  And  it  is  evident  from  the  constitution  of  the  world, 
(10)  and  from  the  predictions  of  future  contingences(12)  which  ac- 
tually come  to  pass, (11)  that  this  foreknowledge  of  God  (Acts  15: 

18,  yvtaGxd  an  aitavog  iaii  tw  ^fcjJ  navia  rd  egya  uvtov  known  unto 
God  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  are  all  his  works),  is  of  the 


^  22.]  DIVINE    INTELLIGENCE.  209 

greatest  extent,  and  that  it  embraces  those  plans  of  God,  which  pre- 
suppose that  creatures  will  be  in  a  particular  situation  and  will  pur- 
sue a  particular  course  of  conduct  ;(9)  it  is  therefore  evident,  that 
God  has  a  perfect  knowledge  of  future  events  in  the  natural  world, 
and  likewise  of  the  free  actions  of  his  creatures. (10)  The  prophe- 
cies above  alluded  to,  are  the  accomplished  predictions  of  Jesus ; 
which  he  pronounced  by  virtue  of  his  union  with  God,  and  not  only 
in  the  narrow  circle  of  his  friends,(13)  but  also  in  public  ;(14)  so 
that  even  his  enemies  well  recollected  them. (15) 

Illustration  1. 

The  divine  intelligence  inscrutable. 

Even  in  those  things  in  which  we  can  observe  an  adaptation  of  means 
to  their  ends,  we  are  not  able  to  discover  all  the  means  which  the 
wisdom  of  God  has  used  for  the  accomplishment  of  those  excellent 
designs  ;  and  we  are  often  unable  to  penetrate  into  the  internal  na- 
ture of  objects,  which  we  are  compelled  to  regard  with  the  highest 
admiration  ;  nor  can  we  in  all  cases,  discover  the  power  by  which 
ends  are  accomplished.^  It  therefore  becomes  us  to  be  modest  in 
our  decisions,^  and  to  confess  that  the  knowledge  and  wisdom  of 
God  are  beyond  our  comprehension.^  It  would  be  the  height  of 
folly,  to  pretend  to  a  perfect  knowledge  of  the  inscrutable  God,^ 
and  to  admit  of  no  divine  mysteries  f  but  whenever  we  are  not  able 
to  discover  the  benevolent  designs  of  God  in  any  thing,  unhesita- 
tingly to  deny,  that  any  can  exist  which  are  worthy  of  him.  On 
the  contrary,  whenever  the  designs  of  God  are  inscrutable  to  us^  we 
ought  still  to  believe,  that  he  has  designs  of  the  most  benevolent  na- 
ture ;  because  subsequent  experience  has  so  often  shown  this  to  be 
fact,  in  regard  to  former  mysterious  events.''' 

Kant  remarks,  that  "  we  are  not  qualified  to  infer  that  the  high- 
est possible  wisdom  belongs  to  God,  from  the  lessons  of  instruction 
afforded  by  an  acquaintance  with  the  world  ;  because  nothing  short 
of  omniscience,  can  determine,  in  reference  to  any  given  world  with 
which  we  may  become  acquainted,  whether  its  perfection  is  so  great, 
that  no  greater  could  possibly  have  been  displayed  either  in  its  cre- 
ation or  government." 

1  Job  38:  39.  2  Job  40:  1—5.  42:  1—6. 

3  Is.  40:  13, 14,  28.  55:  8,  9.  Rom.  11:  33.  Ps.  139:  6. 

4  Matt.  11:27.  1  Cor.  2:  11.  5  1  Cor.  2:  10,  7.  Eph.  3;  9. 
6  Rom.  11:  33.                          7  Compare  §  18.  Illust.  1. 

27 


210  OP  GOD.  [bK.  II- 

III.  2.  Vide  Jacobi,  sup.  cit.  No.  I.  ^  2.  Vol.  I.  p.  3.  Psalm 
104 :  24.  147:  4.  Is.  40:  28.  Prov.  3:  19,  20.  Jer.  51:  15. 

III.  3.  Matt.  10:  29,  30,  vfAMv  xal  ai  rgixfS  rtjg  iceqfakijg  nuoai 
rjgt'&firifjiivai  elol  and  all  the  hairs  of  your  head  are  numbered.  Ps. 
56:  9. 

III.  4.  Ps.  139:  7—16.  Is.  29: 15.  Jer.  16: 17,  23,  24.  Matt. 
6:  4,  6,  8.  Ps.  10:  14,  17.  38:  10.  Dan.  2:  22. 

III.  5.  1  John  3:  20,  fxil^cov  IgtIv  6  &e6g  zrjg  xagdlag  rifioJv,i(at 
yivtoGxei  nccvTa  God  is  greater  than  our  hearts,  and  knoweth  all 
things.  Heb.  4:  13. 

III.  6.  Kant,  in  his  "  Critik  der  Urtheilskraft,"  <^  86,  says : 
"  We  are  obliged,  in  reference  to  the  highest  possible  good  (the  har- 
mony or  connexion  of  happiness  and  virtue  in  rational  beings)  which 
can  be  attained  under  the  divine  government,  to  look  upon  God  as 
omniscient ;  in  order  that  he  may  not  be  unacquainted  with  the  in- 
most thoughts  and  dispositions  of  his  creatures,  which  constitute  the 
true  moral  character  of  their  actions."  Also  in  his  "  Critique  on 
practical  reason,"  (p.  252),  he  says,  "  God  must  be  omniscient,  in 
order  to  have  a  perfect  knowledge  of  my  inmost  thoughts  and  se- 
cret disposition,  in  all  possible  cases,  and  through  all  futurity." 

III.  7.  Ps.  7:  9,  10.  Jer.  17:  10.  Prov.  24: 12.  Matt.  6:4,  6. 
1  Cor.  4:  5.  All  these  passages  contain  the  position,  "  that  God 
rewards  and  punishes,  according  to  his  most  perfect  knowledge  of 
the  human  heart." 

III.  8.  Ps.  139:  1—12.  Luke  16:  15.  Acts  1:  24.  Rom.  8: 
27.  God  has  the  most  perfect  acquaintance  with  the  human  heart 
and  life,  i^aQdioyvolaxrig — o  igevvo)v  rag  xagdiag'  comp.  1  John 
3:20. 

III.  9.  1  Pet.  1:  20.  1  Cor.  2:  7.  2  Tim.  1:  9.  Epb.  1:4  etc. 
The  plan  of  God  for  the  salvation  of  mankind  through  Jesus,  and 
which,  according  to  the  texts  quoted,  he  formed  from  eternity ;  pre- 
supposes a  foreknowledge  of  the  free  actions  and  of  the  whole  con- 
dition of  the  human  family.  Therefore,  God  must,  as  Jacobi  re- 
marks, have  foreseen  the  fall  of  the  human  race.  Compare  Rev. 
17:  8,  (OP  ov  yhyQanxav  za  ovOfAaxa  ano  ^ata^oX^g  tov  xoGf^ov 
whose  names  are  not  recorded  from  eternity,  in  the  book  of  life  ; 
comp.  Rev.  13:  8. 

III.  10.  Ps.  139:  2,  16.  Jer.  1:  5.  Gal.  1:  15^  comp.  Acts 
26:  19.  God  had  appointed  the  apostle  Paul,  from  his  birth,  to  be 
an  apostle  of  the  gentiles  ;  because  he  foresaw  that  he  would  obey 


§  22.]  THE  DIVINE  PRESCIENCE.  211 

the  heavenly  call,  ovx  dmt&r^g  iyevofirjv  irj  ovgavlm  omaala  I  did 
not  disobey  the  heavenly  vision. 

Therefore,  God  possesses  the  most  perfect  knowledge,  not  only 
of  himself  [scientia  Dei  necessaria  vel  naturalis],  Matt.  11:  27.  I 
Cor.  2:  10,  11,  and  of  every  thing  which  actually  exists  or  has  ex- 
isted ;  but  also  of  all  things  possible,  whether  they  are  such  as  shall 
hereafter  occur,  or  whether  they  shall  never  have  actual  existence. 
See  §  30.  Illust.  10, 

III.  11.  Vide  Jacobi  sup.  cit.  No.  XII.  <5>  13—18.  Vol.  II.  p. 
209  etc.  where  the  author  adduces  several  cases,  in  which  the  pro- 
visions of  nature  coincide,  in  the  most  perfect  manner,  with  contin- 
gent occurrences  ;  for  example,  the  relative  proportion  in  the  num- 
ber of  both  sexes  of  the  human  family. 

III.  12.  The  divine  attribute  which  is  commonly  termed  fore- 
knowledge or  prescience,  is  described  as  something  peculiar  to  the 
supreme  God,  in  the  following  passages  :  Is.  41:  22  etc.  42:  8,  9. 
43:  8,  9  etc.  44:  6  etc.  45:  19  etc.  46:  9  etc.  48:  3  etc.  Hess, 
(in  his  "  Bibliothek  of  sacred  history,"  Vol.  II.  p.  223,  where  he 
adduces  these  passages),  remarks :  "  Isaiah  undoubtedly  sets  the 
declarations  of  the  God  of  Israel,  as  genuine  and  true,  and  as  au- 
thenticated by  actual  fulfilment,  in  contrast  with  the  lying  oracles  of 
the  heathen,  when  he  calls  upon  the  pagan  gods  to  prove  their  truth 
and  their  prescience  of  events,  in  the  manner  the  God  of  Israel  did." 

III.  13.  To  his  disciples  Jesus  predicted  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem, Mark  13:  3  etc. ;  his  death  and  resurrection,  Matt.  20: 
17—19  ;  the  denial  of  Peter,  Matt.  26:  34  ;  and  in  Mark  11:  1—6, 
he  informed  them,  that  they  would  find  an  ass'  colt  tied,  and  would 
obtain  it  without  difficulty.  In  like  manner,  he  predicted  that  they 
would  meet  a  man  carrying  a  pitcher,  and  that  he  would  be  their 
guide  to  the  house  where  the  passover  was  to  be  prepared  for  him, 
Mark  14:  13—16.' 

III.  14.  Jesus  announces  to  a  large  multitude  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  (Luke  18:  41  etc.  Comp.  Matt.  22:  7  with  21:  46). 
Thus  also  he  declared  before  the  chief  priests  and  elders  of  the  peo- 

1  If  we  adopt  the  opinions  of  other  interpreters  (Gabler,  Paulus,  Kuinol,  and 
Stolz),  that  Jesus  had  previously  planned  all  this  with  the  householder,  in  order 
that  Judas  might  not  too  soon  find  out  the  place  where  he  intended  to  keep  the 
Passover,  and  la)'  hold  of  him  at  the  time  of  it ;  this  narrative  will  then  prove, 
that  Jesus  was  perfectly  acquainted,  beforehand,  with  the  measures  taken  by  his 
enemies,  and  particularly  by  Judas  who  betrayed  him.  See  Hess'  Lebensges- 
chichte  Jesu,  Band  II.  S.  317.  "  Jesus  had  a  particular  person  in  view,  whom 
he  did  not  wish  to  mention  at  that  time  ;  but  he  availed  himself  of  this  opportun- 
ity to  demonstrate  to  his  disciples,  how  perfectly  he  was  acquainted  with  the 
issue  which  his  affairs  would  take." 


212  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

pie,  that  the  Jews  would,  by  their  own  fault,  be  excluded  from  the 
christian  church,  and  the  Heathen  be  admitted  into  it,  (Matt.  21: 
43.  comp.  V.  23).  He  foretold  the  ill  treatment  which  the  heralds 
of  the  Gospel  would  receive  from  the  Jews,  and  the  consequences 
of  it  (Matt.  23:  34  etc.) ;  the  treatment  which  he  should  himself 
meet  with  from  the  Jews  (Matt.  21:  37)  ;  his  own  execution  (Luke 
13:  33)  (in  the  presence  of  the  Pharisees,  v.  31)  ;  his  death  and 
resurrection  (John  2:  19 — 22) — (before  the  Jews  who  were  assem- 
bled in  the  temple,  v.  14) ;  and  his  death  and  the  subsequent  prop- 
agation of  his  doctrines  among  other  nations  (John  10:  11 — 18). 

III.  15.     Acts  6:  14.    Matt.  27:  63  etc.  40.    26:  61.     Flatt's 
Magazine,  and  Hess,  sup.  cit.  p.  816. 


SECTION    XXIII. 


The  goodness  of  God, 

Of  the  fact,  that  God  is  good  to  all  his  creatures,(l)  especially  to 
his  rational  creatures,(2)  for  the  sake  of  whose  moral  nature  the 
world  was  created  (<§>  18.  Illust.  7),  we  may  easily  be  convinced,  if 
with  a  calm  and  candid  mind,  we  lay  ourselves  open  to  those  im- 
pressions and  feelings  which  the  contemplation  of  nature(3)  awak- 
ens in  us  ;  and  especially,  as  it  is  natural  for  us  to  expect,  that  the 
Being  who  implanted  parental  love  in  our  bosoms,  would  himself 
entertain  love  for  his  creatures. (4)  Nor  ought  this  conviction  to  be 
shaken  by  those  frequent  incidents  of  adversity  which  we  meet  with 
in  life.  For,  experience  teaches  that  they  often  pave  the  way  to 
important  blessings. (5)  They  tend  to  this  important  result,  being 
only  more  vigorous  means  of  education,  which  are  perfectly  consis- 
tent(6)  with  the  paternal  love  of  God.  They  enable  us  to  make 
greater  advances  in  spiritual  improvement(7)  and  moral  excellence, 
and  they  inspire  us  with  greater  reverence (8)  for  that  moral  Gov- 
ernor, whom,  according  to  the  dictates  of  our  nature,  we  are  bound 
to  obey,  but  whom  in  prosperity  we  are  prone  to  forget. (9)  And 
thus  they  make  us  more  tranquil  in  this  life,  and  more  happy  in  the 
world  to  come. (10)  It  is  indeed  true,  that  those  who  submit  en- 
tirely to  the  providence  of  God, (II)  are  sometimes  overtaken  by 


<^  23.]  THE  DIVINE  GOODNESS.  21 3 

afflictions,  the  advantage  of  which  they  are  not  able  immediately  to 
discover.  But  our  heavenly  Father,  whose  intelligence  far  surpass- 
es our  conceptions  (^  22.  Illust.  1),  can  discover  advantages  in  ad- 
versity (Heb.  12:  9,  10),  which  are  concealed  from  the  view  of  his 
children, (12)  and  which  shall  yet  be  enjoyed(13)  at  some  future 
period.(14) 

Illustration  1. 

Psalm  145:  9.  104:  31,  10—14,  16—22,  25,  27  etc.  136:  25. 
147:  8  etc.  Luke  12:  24,  6. 

III.  2.     Luke  12:  7,  24.  Matt.  6:  26,  30. 

III.  3.  Ps.  136:  5— 9.  104:  1—24.  Jer.  5:  24.  Acts  14:  17. 
17:  25,  28,  didovg  Ttaai  C(oi]p  xal  nvoriv  xcct  napxa  giveth  to  all,  life 
and  breath  and  all  things.  1  Tim.  4:  3  etc.  6:  17,  ^log  naQixtav 
iQ^lv  navta  nXovaitag  tig  dnoXavaiv  God  giveth  us  richly  all  things 
for  our  enjoyment. 

III.  4.  Matt.  7:  9—11.  Ps.  103:  13,  Drtn  t]"'23-!::?  nfij  t]h'n3 
ri<n';-b?  njsr;  as  a  father  pitieth  his  children,  Jehovah  pities  them 
that  fear  him.  Is.  49:  15.  Luke  15:  11  etc.  In  the  parable  of 
the  lost  son,  the  character  of  Jesus  as  a  merciful  God,  is  represent- 
ed by  the  disposition  of  a  father  toward  his  disobedient  child.  On 
the  different  modifications  of  the  divine  love,  and  its  different  names, 
(grace,  mercy,  patience,  longsuffering),see  Schott's  Epitome  theol. 
Christ,  dog.  p.  47. 

III.  5.     Gen.  45:  5 — 13.  50:  20.     In  the  latter  passage,  Joseph 

says  to  his  brethren,  i^^t2l^  '"^^^tl  t^'^H^^.  ^^^"1  "^^^  ^r3^'4?tl  ^^^  you 
designed  evil  against  me,  but  God  meant'it  for  good. 

III.  6.  Prov.  3:  12.  comp.  Heb.  12:  5 — 9,  ov  ayan^  nvQtog, 
Tiatdeviv  whom  the  Lord  loveth,  he  chasteneth. 

III.  7.  Rom.  5:  3  etc.  Heb.  12:  10,  11,  naaa  naidda — vars- 
Qov  de  xagnov  sigrjvtxov  xo7g  di  avtijg  yeyvfivaofxevocg  ccnodldajai  dt- 
natoavvrjg  all  chastisement — afterwards  it  produces  the  peaceful 
fruit  of  righteousness  to  those  who  are  exercised  by  it. 

III.  8.  Is.  26:  16,  '^nlj":^  ^ira  n\!T;  Jehovah !  in  distress  they 
look  around  for  thee. 

III.  9.  Luke  8:  14,  vno — nlomov  xat  iqdovtov  tov  ^iov  avfi" 
nvlyovzai,. 

III.  10.     Rom.  2:  14,  15,  16,  6—10. 


214  OF  GOD.  [BK.  II. 

III.  11.  Persons  who  disregard  the  intimations  and  chastise- 
ments of  divine  Providence,  are  described  in  Rom.  2:  4  etc.  Amos 
4:  6  etc. 

III.  12.  2  Cor.  4:  17,  18,  /u>i  oitonovvTfov  ijfiojv  ta  pXenofUPtXy 
dkXcc  ra  juij  pXenofiiva  we  do  not  look  only  at  the  things  which  are 
seen  in  this  world,  but  at  those  which  are  as  yet  invisible.  Rom. 
8:  24. 

III.  13.  The  divine  permission  of  moral  evil  is  discussed  in  § 
39.  Illust.  4 ;  it  is  the  permission  of  natural  evil  alone  which  is 
spoken  of  here. 

III.  14.  Rom.  8:  17—23.  Col.  3:  3  etc.  2  Thess.  1:  4—10. 
The  benefit  of  such  afflictions,  will  be  brought  to  light  only  in  the 
future  world.  Matt.  5:  12,  o  fitaOog  v(i6)v  noXvg  Iv  xolg  ovgavoTg 
great  is  your  reward  in  heaven. 


SECTION  XXIV 


The  justice  and  holiness  of  God. 

Even  the  love  of  God  induces  him  to  avenge  the  injury  which 
the  members  of  the  human  family,  who  are  all  equally  dear  to  him, 
inflict  on  each  other.(l)  His  love(2)  urges  him  to  support  the  dig- 
nity of  those  laws,  which  the  same  love  had  prompted  him  to  give  to 
men  because  his  wisdom  pronounced  them  salutary. (3)  The  voice 
of  conscience,  and  that  belief  of  a  future  retribution  which  is  so 
deeply  founded  in  the  constitution  of  our  moral  nature  (Rom.  2:  14, 
15.  1 :  32.  <5»  16))  prove  to  us,  that  our  conduct  has  the  most  im- 
portant influence  on  our  happiness  ;(4)  that  God,  on  whom  we  are 
dependant,  distributes(5)  with  the  most  perfect  impartiality,(6)  hap- 
piness to  the  virtuous(7)  and  misery  to  the  vicious  ;(8)  and  that  the 
measures  of  his  rewards  and  punishments,  is  exactly  proportionate 
to  the  degree  of  our  faithfulness  or  unfaithfulness. (9)  In  reference 
to  this  twofold  judicial(lO)  act  of  God,  we  ascribe  to  him  jus- 
tice ;{ll)  and  we  infer  from  this  attribute, (12)  that  he,  whose  earnest 
wish  it  is  that  we  should  be  holy,  must  himself  be  the  archetype  of 
holiness;  (13)  or,  that  he  himself  loves  that  moral  excellence  which 


^  24.]  THE  DIVINE  JUSTICE  AND  HOLINESS.  215 

he  endeavours  to  promote  by  his  promises  and  rewards,  and  hates 
that  evil  which  he  endeavours  to  prevent  by  his  menaces  and  pun- 
ishments.(14) 

Illustration  1. 

SThess.  1:6,7.  1  Pet.  2:23.  Psalm  10.^  Luke  lS:l,6di 
{)£6g  ov  (.ifj  T[0irj(T6i  iKdiKrjaiv  toiv  i^XiKiMv  avtov  twv  ^omviwv  TiQog 
avTOv  r^f^iQccg  aul  vvitiog ; — Xtyw  vftTv  6ztnoti]a£i — iv  laxft,  and  will 
not  God  avenge  his  elect  who  cry  unto  him  day  and  night  ? — I  say 
unto  you,  he  will  shortly  avenge  them.  Matt.  18:  32  etc.  comp. 
Michaelis  on  "  the  Scripture  doctrine  relative  to  sin  and  the  atone- 
ment." §  6,  8.  2d  edit. 

III.  2.     Compare  Michaelis  above  referred  to,  <5>  8.  p.  40  etc. 

III.  3.  Is.  48:  17,  18.  Ps.  119:  144.  Rom.  7:  12,  »J  ///toAtJ— 
ciyad^rj  the  commandment  is  good.     8:  6  etc. 

III.  4.  Mai.  3:  13—18.  Gen.  18:  25.  There  is  a  difference 
between  the  destiny  of  the  good  and  the  wicked." 

III.  5.  Rom.  2:  6—10.  2  Cor.  5:  10.  (compare  Heb.  10:  38.) 
These  three  passages  speak  of  the  future  righteous  judgment  of 
God.  Although,  in  the  present  life,  happiness  and  misery  fre- 
quently appear  not  to  be  proportionate  to  the  moral  worth  of  men 
(Ps.  37.  73:  3  etc.  ;)  yet  it  by  no  means  follows,  that  we  are  de- 
ceived by  the  opinion,  so  deeply  rooted  in  our  moral  nature,  that 
the  destiny  of  every  individual  shall  be  according  to  his  moral 
worth.  For  we  often  behold  a  reversion  in  the  lot  of  men  (Ps.  37: 
35  etc. ;)  and  where  this  is  not  the  case,  a  mind  that  reflects  and  is 
susceptible  of  moral  feelings,  if  unable  to  account  for  the  prosperity 
lof  vice  or  the  suffering  of  virtue,  will  naturally  be  led  to  the  antici- 
pation of  a  future  retribution  from  God  (2  Thess.  1:  5 — 7.)  But 
we  can  discover  some  reasons,  why,  on  the  one  hand,  the  children  of 
God,  always  imperfect,  should  not,  while  in  this  world,  in  this  nur- 
sery for  heaven,  be  exempted  from  all  the  grievances  attendant  on 
a  state  of  probation  (<§>  23  ;)  and  why,  on  the  other  hand,  God 
should  not  instantaneously  annihilate  the  wicked,  whom  he  wishes 
to  gain  by  his  goodness,  and  some  of  whom  he  foresees  will  actually 
reform.  Nay,  this  forbearance  of  God  toward  the  wicked,  may,  in 
various  ways,  be  beneficial  to  those  who  are  more  virtuous ;  for 
they  sustain  various  relations  to  them,  and  also  themselves  stand  in 
need  of  similar  forbearance,  on  account  of  their  own  sins  and  their 
slow  progress  in  virtue. 

111.  6.     Rom.  2:  11,  ovtc  eaic  ngoatonoXtjxljia  nagd  rcj?  &£m  there 


216  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

is  no  respect  of  persons  with  God.  I  Pet.  1:  17.  Col.  3:  25.  4:  1. 
Eph.  6:  8,  9. 

III.  7.  Rom.  2:  13.  10:  5.  Gal.  3:  12,  6  noti^aag  ccma  (sc.  t« 
rov  vofiovy)  ^i']aeTcct,  tv  avioJg  he  that  doth  these  things,  viz.  the 
things  of  the  law,  shall  live  in  them.  Eph.  6:  8.  Matt.  19:  17. 
comp.  Heb,  11:  6,  o  "d^sog  To7g  ix^fjiovaiv  avxovy  i^iad^anodoirjg 
ylvitai,  God  is  a  re  warder  of  them  that  seek  him. 

^  III.  8.  ^Mal.  2:  17.  l^om.  1:  18.  2:  2  etc.,  12.  Col.  3:  25, 
6  &e6g  r]fAMv  no^LehctL,  o  ridiiAriot  he  that  doeth  wrong,  shall  receive 
what  he  hath  done  amiss,  Heb.  10:  29 — 31.  12  :  29,  6 -^eog  i^fAwv 
nvQ  xaiavakiGKOP  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire.  Although  the 
punishments  of  God  (Luke  21:  23.  comp.  v.  22,  and  Rom.  2:  5,) 
and  likewise  his  punitive  justice,  are  called  the  wrath  of  God  (opy»i,) 
and  are  represented  by  figures  of  a  terrific  nature  ;  yet  the  writers 
of  the  Bible,  and  in  particular  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament, 
were  well  acquainted  with  the  divine  goodness  and  grace.  See  Ex. 
34:  6,  n73&«j  nDh-a-i-;  np  Dfi<  rjnN  "j^shn  n^nn  b^  ri'ini  Jehovah  God, 
merciful  and  gracious,  slow  to  anger  and  abounding  in  grace  and 
truth,  Deut.  4:  31.  Ps.  145:  8.  103:  8—14.  130:  4  etc.  rT^nbprr 
•ya:^  forgiveness  with  thee.  Joel  2:  13.  Lam.  3:  33.  And  as  they 
knew  that  God  is  not  angry  after  the  manner  of  men  (Hos.  11:  9. 
comp.  <§.  26.  Illust.  5,)  it  is  therefore  reasonable,  that  no  philosopher 
should  denounce  their  anthropopathic  expressions  ;  and  the  more 
so,  since  even  the  purest  expressions  which  are  applied  to  God,  to 
his  attributes  and  actions,  are  always  anthropopathic.  Relative  to 
ogyrjvis  applied  to  God,  Kypke  (on  Rom.  2:  5)  says,  ^^ogyi]  non 
iram  divinam,  neque  etiam  qualescunque  hujus  irae  efFectus,  sed 
poenam  designat,  quam  Deus  ut  Justus  Judex  infligit ;"  ogyrj  does 
not  signify  the  divine  wrath,  neither  does  it  denote  the  various 
effects  of  this  anger  ;  but  it  designates  the  punishment  which  God  as 
a  just  Judge,  inflicts."  He  adduces  passages  from  Demosthenes, 
Aeschines,  and  Dionysius  Halicarn.  in  which  ogyi]  signifies  punish- 
ment, and  a  few  in  which  it  denotes  punishment  inflicted  by  law. 
In  the  passage  Rom.  2:  5,  ogyrj  is  explained  anoxakvxptg  rrjg  dmac- 
oxpta/a?  manifestation  of  the  punitive  justice  of  God.  Comp.  Heb. 
3:  11,  and  Johan.  van  Voorst,  "  On  the  divine  punishments,"  in  the 
publication  of  the  Society  at  the  Hague  for  the  defence  of  the  chris- 
tian religion,  1794,  p.  56  etc.  Compare  also  Schleusner's  Lex.  art. 
ogyrj  No.  3. 

See  Jacobi's  "  Dissertations  on  important  points  in  religion,"  No. 
X.  vol.  II.  p.  87  etc.  Kant's  "  Critik  der  Urtheilskraft,"  <§>  88.  p. 
430  etc.  Prolegomena,  p.  276  etc.  "  Critik  der  practischen  Ver- 
nunft,"  p.  276  etc.     (Compare  with  this,  Flatt's   "  Observv.  ad 


§  24.]  DIVINE  JUSTICE  AND  HOLINESS.  217 

comparandam  Kantianam  disciplinam  cum  Christiana  doctrina  per- 
tinentes,"  «5>  VI.)  Fichte's  "  Versuch  einer  Critik  aller  OfFenba- 
rung,"  p.  127.  (2d  ed.  p.  189  etc.)  Tieftrunk's  "Censur  des 
Protestantischen  LehrbegrifFs,"  Pt.  III.  Introd.  "  On  symbolic 
knowledge  in  reference  to  religion."  Comp.  "  Letters  on  Kant's, 
Fichte's,  and  Forberg's  Theory  of  religion,"  in  Flatt's  Magazine, 
Pt.  V.  p.  217  etc.  See  also  Jacobi,  "  Von  den  gottlichen  Din- 
gen,"  p.  182.  comp.  with  Weisz,  "  On  the  living  God,"  p.  23  etc. 
220  etc.  and  Ewald's  "  Religious  doctrines  of  the  Bible,"  Vol.  1.  p. 
6,  79.  All  these  writings  refer  to  the  symbolic  knowledge  of  God, 
or  the  knowledge  of  God  according  to  analogy,  and  on  the  anthro- 
popathic  designations  of  the  attributes  and  actions  of  God,  which  are 
founded  on  this  kind  of  knowledge.  Our  knowledge  of  God  is 
analogical  (symbolic)  or  anthropomorphic,  so  far  as  we  consider  the 
divine  Being,  his  attributes  and  actions,  as  resembling  the  actions 
and  attributes  of  men  ;  for  we  do  not  know  what  God  in  himself  is, 
nor  how  he  acts.  Compare  Reinhard's  Dogmatik,  p.  93.  Here 
may  be  mentioned  the  threefold  method  (stated  by  Sartorius)  of  ar- 
riving at  a  knowledge  of  God,  via  negationis,  via  cminentiae,  via 
causalitatis.  Vide  Sartorii  Compend.  p.  79.  and  compare  Rein- 
hard's Dogmatik,  p.  92.  Fichte,  in  his  well  known  Dissertation, 
"  on  the  ground  of  our  knowledge  of  God"  (p.  16  etc.,)  objects, 
that  "  this  symbolic  knowledge  of  God,  is  contradictory  ;  because 
we  represent  to  ourselves  an  infinite  being,  by  predicates  which  be- 
long only  to  limited  and  finite  beings."  Compare  what  is  said  in 
refutation  of  this,  in  the  "  Letters  on  Fichte's  theory  of  religion," 
in  Flatt's  Magazine,  Pt.  6.  p.  206  etc.  Pt.  5.  p.  229  etc.  And 
here  it  may  not  be  improper  to  quote  from  Brastberger's  treatise, 
"On  the  ground  of  our  belief  in  God"  (1802,)  a  passage  (p.  104 — 
107)  containing  the  result  of  his  reasoning  :  "  It  is  true,  the  attri- 
butes which  I  ascribe  to  God,  are  properties  which  I  find  in  myself; 
only  they  are  conceived  apart  from  those  limitations  and  particular 
determinations  which  they  have  and  must  have  in  me.  It  is  true, 
that  the  removal  of  these  limitations  and  particular  determinations, 
leaves  me  only  general  conceptions,  which  can  never  have  an  actual 
existence.  And  it  is  further  true,  that  as  soon  as  we  wish  to  deter- 
mine those  indefinite  conceptions  or  properties,  we  are  compelled  to 
ascribe  to  God,  finite  and  limited  attributes.  But  notwithstanding 
this,  our  knowledge  of  God,  is  neither  vain  nor  contradictory.  For, 
when  I  ascribe  to  him  human  attributes,  such  as  understanding  and 
will,  with  the  removal  of  the  particular  determinations  of  our  finite 
understanding  and  will  ;  my  idea  amounts  to  this  :  "  if  I  possessed 
the  faculty  of  knowing  God  immediately,  I  should  find  in  him  only 
such  properties,  as  could  and  would  effect  every  thing  which  my 
faculties  would  effect,  if  they  could  ever  be  divested  of  limits  and 

28 


218  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II, 

extended  to  infinity.  This  knowledge  of  God,  is  by  no  means  so 
definite  and  perfect  as  I  could  wish  ;  yet  it  is  perfectly  adequate  for 
that  purpose  for  which,  in  general,  faith  in  God  is  necessary  to  me.'  " 

III.  9.  Luke  19:  16—19,  24—26.  2  Cor.  9:  6.  Matt.  11:  22, 
24.  Luke  47:  48.  All  these  passages  contain  this  position  :  the 
measure  of  future  happiness  or  misery,  will  differ,  according  to  the 
obedience  or  disobedience  of  different  persons. 

III.  10.  2  Tim.  4:  8,  anoaeiTai  fioi  6  Trjg  dtxaiocvvrig  aii- 
q)avog,  ov  dnodojaec  fioc — o  dUaiog  xgitrig  a  crown  of  righteousness  is 
laid  up  for  me,  which  the  righteous  Judge  will  give  me.  Compare 
Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis  dUaiog^  Note  9.  Ps.  7:  12.  Rev.  16:  5 — 7. 
19:  2,  aXt}&tt/al  xal  dizaiai  at  TtQiaeig  avzov  true  and  righteous  are 
his  judgments. 

III.  11.  Ps.  7:  10,  18.  2  Thess.  1:5—7.  Rom.  2:5,  6, 
diitatoxgtaia  rov  "daov^  og  anodojan  inaOTCo  narcc  tcc  h'gya  dxov  the 
just  judgment  of  God,  who  will  render  to  every  one  according  to 
his  works.  Acts  17:  31. 

III.  12.  Ps.  5:  4 — 6,  3>uj^.  ych  bJ<  fi<b  thou  art  not  a  God  who 
delighteth  in  wickedness.  Rev.  15:  3. 

III.  13.  1  Pet.  1:  16  etc.  dyiovytvio^e^  ore  iyco  ctyiog  elfjii  be 
ye  holy,  for  I  am  holy.  Eph.  4:  24.  Matt.  5:  45,  48,  ioea^e  rtXetoi 
djOTteg  6  naT7]Q  v^icjv  6  iv  xo7g  ovgavoTg  riXatog  laiv  be  ye  therefore 
perfect,  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is  perfect.  2  Pet.  1:  4. 

III.  14.  1  John  1:  5,  &t6g  qioig  iaii,  nat  anoila  ovx  tart  iv  avTcS 
ovde/Aia  God  is  light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all.  Deut.  32: 
4.  James  1:  13. 


SECTION    XXV. 

The  spirituality  of  God. 


As  every  rational  and  moral  power,  is  termed  a  spirit ;  so  God  is 
a  Spirit,  John  4:  24.(1)  And  he  regards  not  the  external  service 
of  his  worshippers,  but  the  uprightness  and  sincerity  of  their  minds 
(nveuficc  xal  dXi^^etav,)  v.  23:  24.  And  man  can  resemble  God, (2) 
only  by  the  excellence  and  perfection  of  his  spirit,  or  mind ;  and 


!^  26.]  THE  DIVINE  SPIRITUALITY.  219 

not  in  his  corporeal  properties  and  actions,  for  these  cannot  in  any 
measure  belong  to  God. (3) 

Illustration  1. 

John  4:  24,  nvsvfia  6  'diog'  ital  xovg  nQoaxwovvrag  ccvtov,  iv 
mvevfxaTi,  nal  dXrj&eta  del  ngoGnvvHv  God  is  a  Spirit,  and  they  that 
worship  him  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in  truth. — ^vj  v- 
fi  ax  t  it  a  I  a  Kf]  d^  e  i  a'ls  a  hendiadys,^  for  nvevfiatc  dXri&tvM,  or, 
as  it  is  expressed  in  Heb.  10:  22,  evccX7]&ivrj  aaQdla.  with  an  up- 
right heart.  Similar  examples  may  be  seen  in  the  Dissert,  de 
sensu  vocis  nX^gmfia,  Note  60.  Opuscul.  Acad.  Vol.  I.  p.  174  etc. 

III.  2.  Col.  3:  10,  Ivdvad^avot,  zov  viov  (dv&QconovJ  tov 
\ttvtt7taivovfjievov — nat'  eixova  tov  ttiiaavTog  auxov  have  put  on  the 
mew  man,  who  is  renewed  according  to  the  image  of  his  Creator. — 
Luke  6:  35  etc.  comp.  «§>  24. 

III.  3.  Rom.  1:  23.  Ex.  20:  4,  "  Thou  shalt  not  make  any 
image  of  God."^  1  Tim.  6:  16,  ov  ddev  ovdelgdv^gioTKav^ovditdelv 
^ufara*  whom  no  man  hath  seen  or  can  see.  1:17,  acp^ugtog — (nogn- 
tog  -f^eog  incorruptible — invisible  God. 


SECTION   XXVI, 


The  veracity  of  God, 

The  vast  intelligence,  power,  goodness  and  holiness  of  God,  re- 
quire,(l)  that  we  should  place  unlimited  confidence  in  him;  and 
particularly,  that  we  should  regard  his  declarations  as  perfectly  to 
be  depended  on. (2)  For  he  who  is  not  willing  to  repose  implicit 
confidence  in  God  (1  John  5:  10),  must  either  be  so  foolish,  as  to 
believe  that  whatever  is  concealed  from  himself  must  be  unknown 


[1  Hendiadys,  is  a  figure  of  speech,  used  by  grammarians  to  designate  that 
mode  of  expression  which  consists  of  two  substantives  joined  together  by  the 
conjunction  an<Z,  and  put  in  the  same  case,  whereas,  according  to  the  sense,  one 
of  these  substantives  should  be  an  adjective  qualifying  the  other,  or  a  genitive 
following  it.  Thus  in  Hebrew,  ''^aS  t<S2T  ^^B"^h  changes  and  a  host  are 
against  me,  i.  e.  changes  of  hosts,  or  hosts  'constantly  receiving  new  supplies, 
Job  10:  17.     S.] 

2  Staudlin  observes  (Elements  of  Dogmatics,  2d.  ed.  p.  199):  "  It  deserves 
notice,  that  God,  though  represented  under  the  strongest  anthropopathic  ex- 
pressions, would  not  be  worshipped  by  any  image." 


220  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II, 

to  God  also,  or  he  must  distrust  him  who  is  the  archetype  of  holi- 
ness ;(3)  or,  forgetful  of  the  providence  and  power  of  God,(4)  he 
must  apprehend,  that  God  may  become  involved  in  difficulties,  and 
have  occasion  to  revoke  his  purposes ; — a  supposition  derogatory  to 
the  divine  dignity, (5)  and  applicable  only  to  a  weak  and  changea- 
ble man.  Even  the  idea  of  a  future  retribution,  which  leads  us  to 
believe  the  existence  of  a  God  (<J  18),  leads  us  also  to  believe  him 
a  God  of  veracity(6)  and  immutability,(7)  a  God  in  whom  implicit 
confidence(8)  may  be  reposed.  And  that  anticipation  would  itself 
be  unwarranted,  and  might  prove  delusive ;  if  we  could  suppose  it 
possible  for  God  to  deceive  us,  or  to  awaken  in  us  an  expectation 
which  he  either  would  not  or  could  not  fulfil ;  or  if  we  could  admit, 
that  the  God  who  formed  a  moral  plan  to  which  he  adapted  the 
structure  of  our  moral  nature,  and  which  he  has  announced  to  us  by 
our  conscience  (§  17,  18),  could  be  unstable  and  changeable,  that 
he  could  abandon  the  plan  which  he  had  adopted,  and  suflfer  the 
expectations  of  our  moral  nature  to  remain  unaccomplished.  We 
assume  as  infallible,  whatever  the  constitution  of  our  nature,  or  God 
the  Author  of  our  nature,  teaches  us.  Nay,  the  principles  of  hu- 
man knowledge  generally,  would  become  uncertain,(9)  if,  as  Des 
Cartes  expresses  it,  God  had  so  framed  our  nature,  that  we  should 
mistake  delusions  for  the  plainest  and  clearest  truths.  If,  therefore, 
we  would  not  be  universal  sceptics,  and  doubt  of  every  thing ;  we 
must  admit, (10)  that  the  Author  of  our  nature,  is  a  God  of  truth, 
and  deserves  our  implicit  confidence. 

Illustration  1. 

Is.  40:  12—31.  Ps.  146:  5  etc.  18:  31  etc.  118:  1—9.  In 
these  passages,  confidence  in  God  is  founded  on  the  divine  good- 
ness, power,  and  wisdom. 

III.  2.  Ps.  33:  4,  tiiir:— isn  'y^\  the  word  of  Jehovah  is  true. 
John  3:  33. 

III.  3.  2  Cor.  1:  18,  19,  nLoiog  6  {^fog,  oit  6  Xoyog  ri^(uv  6 
ngog  vfiag  ov^  iytveio  v  al  xal  o  u,  "  My  doctrine  among  you,  the 
author  of  which  is  the  God  of  truth,  was  not  mutable  and  unstable." 
Comp.  Notitt.  histor.  Epist.  ad  Corinth,  interpret,  servientes,  p. 
101  etc.  in  Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  I.  p.  360  etc. 


^  26J  THE  DIVINE  SPIRITUALITY.  221 

III.  4.  Is.  46:  10  etc.  Rom.  4:  21,  "  He  who  hath  promised, 
is  able  also  to  fulfil." 

III.  5.  Rom.  3:  4,  ysviO'dco  d^fog  akrjd^rjg,  nag  di  avd^Qwnog 
<kpevatt)g  let  God  be  true,  but  every  man  a  liar.  1  Sam.  ]  5:  29, 
**  The  unchangeable  God  of  Israel  does  not  deceive,  or  repent  of 
anything;  for  he  is  not  a  man,  that  he  could  repent."  When, 
therefore,  we  read  in  the  1 1th  verse  of  this  chapter,  that  God  re- 
pented of  his  having  made  Saul  king,  we  must  not  suppose  that  he 
repented  as  man  does.  Neither  did  Moses  intend  to  ascribe  human 
repentance  to  God,  Gen.  6:  6  ;  for  he  well  knew,  that  God  is  not 
a  man  that  he  should  lie  or  repent.  It  therefore  follows,  that  the 
anthropopathic  expression  repentance,  like  that  o(  anger  (<5>  24.  Illust. 
7),  has  a  sense  which  is  not  unworthy  of  God  ; — it  imports,  that  ac- 
cording to  the  immutable  plan  of  God,  persons  who  have  reformed, 
are  not  treated  in  the  same  manner  as  before  their  reformation. 
Comp.  Joel  2:  14,  with  v.  12,  13. 

^  III.  6.  John  3:  33,  -efog  uXri&ng  iaii  God  is  true.  Tit.  1:  2, 
6  dipsvdtjg  {>€6g  God  who  heth  not.  2  Tim.  2:  13,  el  antarovfifv, 
heivog  matog  fAt'vei.  if  we  do  not  believe,  he  remaineth  faithful. 
Heb.  6:  18,  ddwatov  xpsvdea&at  d^eov  it  is  impossible  for  God  to  lie, 

III.  7.  Ex.  3:  14—17,  nrn&$  'T^D&jt  n;'nN  I  am  that  I  am.  6: 
2—8,  ri'-ynl  ^z^^  I  am  Jehovah."  Cent.  7:  8  etc.  Mai.  3:6,  ^I'^rr;  ■»:«? 
'^n^\'^  i<b  I  am  Jehovah,  I  do  not  change.  Rom.  11:  29  ocfAeTafxtlt]- 
ju  xa  xccglafAava  itai  tJ  aX^aig  zov  d^iov  God  will  not  repent  of  his 
gifts  and  calling.  Heb.  6:  17,  to  aiieia^eiov  zrjg  ^ovk-^g  <feov  the 
immutability  of  the  counsel  of  God.  James  1:  17,  nagoi  &€m  ovx 
I'vv  xataXXayi]  tj  zgontjg  anoaxiaafiu  with  God  there  is  no  variable- 
ness or  shadow  of  turning. 

Michaelis  remarks,  on  Ex.  3:  14 — 17,  quoted  in  this  illustration  : 
that  by  the  name  !i;nj<,  as  well  as  by  that  of  nirT"],  God  represents 
himself  as  unchangeable,  (particularly  in  his  promises,  his  friendships 
and  love),  as  a  being  who  will  remain  the  same  forever.  Comp.  al- 
so Dathe,  on  Ex.  6:  3. 

III.  8.     1  Thess.  5:  24.  1  Cor.  1:  9.  Heb.  10:  23. 

111.  9.  Compare  Flatt's  Detached  contributions  for  the  deter- 
mination and  deduction  of  the  idea  and  the  principle  of  causality,  p. 
122  etc.  Michaelis,  Dogmatik,  p.  164. 

III.  10.  "  The  veracity  of  God  is  as  important  to  the  Deist,  as 
to  the  believer  in  revealed  religion.  For,  if  it  were  in  itself  possi- 
ble, and  God  felt  disposed,  he  might  deceive  us  in  nature,  by  pro- 
ducing a  constant  confusion  and  contradiction  of  things,  and  by  mak- 


222  OP  GOD.  [bk.  II. 

ing  reason  mislead  us ;  as  truly  as  he  oould  in  the  Scriptures." 
Allgemeine  Litteratur  Zeitung,  for  1792,  p.  137. 


SECTION  XXVII 


Inference  drawn  from  the  veracity  of  God,  in  favour  of  the  truth 

of  Scripture. 

If  there  be,  (as  has  been  proved  <§>  17 — 19),  a  God  to  whom  ve- 
racity belongs  («§.  26)  ;  then  we  may  receive,  with  perfect  security, 
the  declarations  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ;  which  were  either  produc- 
ed by  God,  and  under  his  influence  (^  6,  9,  10, 11,  13),  or  at  least 
were  sanctioned  by  him  (<§>  9,  12,  13) ;  and  therefore  have  divine 
authority  (<§>  11 — 13).  We  may  of  course  use  them,  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  all  doctrines  in  general,  and  of  that  concerning  the  divine 
attributes  in  particular,  not  only  to  elucidate  the  dictates  of  our  rea- 
son, or  to  prove  the  coincidence*  of  Scripture  with  those  dictates, 
but  in  order  to  derive  from  them  direct  and  solid  arguments  or  evi- 
dence in  support  of  doctrines  of  which  they  treat. 

Illustration. 

*  The  beautiful  coincidence  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  concern- 
ing God,  with  the  established  conclusions  of  reason,  as  appears  from 
a  comparison  of  the  Scriptures  with  the  religious  opinions  of  those 
philosophers^  who  could  not  have  drawn  any  thing  from  the  sacred 
volume ;  should  at  least  inspire  us  with  respect  for  this  volume,  the 
superior  excellence  of  whose  instructions  so  far  surpasses  those  of 
all  other  ancient  writings.  It  ought  to  induce  us  to  read  without 
prejudice,  and  to  estimate  without  partiality,  all  that  they  contain 
concerning  a  particular  dispensation  of  God ;  and  especially,  as  the 
superiority  of  the  holy  Scriptures  over  all  other  writings  of  antiqui- 
ty, so  well  accords  with  the  assumption,  that  the  knowledge  of  God, 
was  in  an  extraordinary  manner,  made  plainer  to  the  sacred  penmen 
than  to  any  other  persons.  Compare  the  Dissertation  entitled, 
"  The  natural  views  of  God  given  in  the  Scriptures,  compared  with 
the  revealed  views  of  the  divine  Being."^ 

1  See  Jacobi's  **  Dissertations  on  important  religious  subjects,"  No.  XV,  XVI. 

2  In  Hess'  Bibliothek  of  sacred  history,  Vol.  II.  p.  113  etc. 


<§>  28.]  THE  DIVINE  UNITY.  223 

Ewald,  in  his  "  Religionslehren  der  Bibel,"^  remarks  :  "  The  pre- 
tended revelations  of  other  ancient  nations,  are  not  at  all  calculated 
to  satisfy  the  spiritual  necessities  of  well  informed  persons,  who  are 
acquainted  with  themselves.  To  many  of  these  necessities,  they 
have  no  reference  at  all. — They  cannot,  in  the  view  of  reason,  as- 
sume an  authenticated  character ;  as  well  because  they  contain 
much  that  is  manifestly  fabulous,  and  of  human  invention  ;  as  be- 
cause they  are  destitute  of  the  positive  evidences  of  a  divine  origin." 
— "  The  writings  which  the  Christian  regards  as  a  divine  revelation, 
even  independently  of  their  divinity,  contain  much  interesting  matter 
calculated  to  enhghten  the  understanding  and  improve  the  heart ; 
they  contain  an  elevated  and  dignified  Theodicea.  In  no  other  re- 
ligion was  every  thing  connected  so  closely  with  God,  with  one,  God, 
as  in  the  Jewish  ;  in  no  other  was  hohness  so  made  the  object  and 
aim  of  every  thing. — No  other  religion  ever  exhibited  such  striking, 
such  undeniable  proof  of  the  supernatural  agency  of  God  ;  none  ev- 
er combined  so  closely  morality  with  religion." — "  And  the  most 
refined  and  enlightened  person,  however  numerous  and  various  his 
necessities,  never  fails  to  find  in  Christianity,  what  is  necessary  to 
meet  all  his  wants. — And  all  this  he  can  find  no  where  else." 


SECTION   XXVIII. 


The  unity  of  God. 

We  can  discover  no  reason  for  believing  in  the  existence  of  more 
than  one  God.  For,  when  we  contemplate{])  the  works  of  nature, 
we  find  that,  so  far  as  our  observation  extends,  they  stand  in  such 
intimate  connexion  with  each  other,  that  their  dependance  on  one 
Creator  and  Lord  becomes  highly  probable  ;(2)  or  if  we  reason  from 
the  idea  of  a  moral  government  of  the  world,  we  cannot  conceive 
how  it  can  be  divided  among  a  multitude  of  regents  ;  unless  we  ad- 
mit that  among  these  regents,  so  arbitrarily  supposed,  there  is  a  per- 
fect unity  of  purposes,  and  of  manner  of  accomplishing  them. (3) 
But  in  a  matter  of  such  importance,  one  which  has  so  great  an  in- 
fluence on  our  exclusive  reverence  and  respect  for  God  (Deut.  6: 


^4  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II, 

5.  Mark  12:  30),  we  ought  to  regard  the  testimony  of  God  himself 
as  of  the  greater  consequence  ;  because  thereby  our  behef  (4)  of 
the  divine  unity,  is  so  confirmed, (5)  that  we  may  now,  with  perfect 
certainty,  affirm  that  there  is  but  one  God.  For  if  the  Creator  and 
Lord  of  nature  had  been  produced  by  another  being  on  whom  he  is 
dependent,  or  if  he  formed  and  governed  this  world  in  conjunction 
with  another  being  ;  he  would  certainly,  as  his  knowledge  is  so  ex- 
tensive, know  something  of  such  a  being.  But  he  knows  of  none 
who  existed  before  him,  or  was  his  superior,  or  who  cooperated  with 
him  in  the  work  of  creation. (6)  Jehovah,  the  God  of  the  Israelites, 
is  the  only  Jehovah  (Deut.  6:  4.  Mark  12:  29 ;)  that  is,  Jehovah, 
the  Creator  and  Lord  of  nature,  is  the  only  Being  to  whom  the 
siame  Jehovah  belongs  :(7)  he  cannot  possess  the  adorable  and 
glorious  perfections  ('IT 33  JiVsi^)  indicated  by  the  name  Jehovah, 
an  common  with  any  other  being  (Is.  42:  8 ;)  beside  God  (the  only 
Governor  fiov(o  dvvccazrj)  there  is  no  governor ;  for  all  others  are 
subject  to  him  Tcoxvgtc^  tmv  xvquvovtcov  1  Tim.  6:  15.  No  one, 
however  distinguished  he  may  be  for  wisdom,  is  wise,  in  compari- 
son with  "  the  only  wise"  (juoi/qj  aoqpw  Rom.  16:  27.)  Compared 
with  God,  there  is  no  one  good,  ovdelg  ccya'&og,  li  lAtj  tTg,  6  '&{6g 
Mark  10:  18.(8)  The  excellences  of  every  other  being,  com- 
pared with  those  of  God,  are  as  nothing ;  much  less  can  any  being 
surpass  or  equal  God  in  divine  attributes. 

Illustration  1. 

"  Every  thing  in  nature  proves  the  unity  of  its  own  adaptation, 
the  unity  of  its  object,  and  the  unity  of  the  means  appointed  for  that 
object.  There  is  nothing  which  can  justify  the  idea  of  different  sys- 
tems, objects,  and  means.  And  beyond  this,  reason  cannot  carry  the 
proof  of  the  unity  of  God."  Platner's  Aphorisms,  Pt.  I  <5.  1143. 
edit,  of  1784.  (in  the  edit,  of  1793,  §  959.)  Compare  Michaelis' 
Dogmatik,  «§>41.  p.  176. 

III.  2.  It  has  been  seen  above  (<5»  18.  Illust.  1.  <5>  23,  24.  Illust. 
8,)  that  when  the  attributes  of  God  have  been  proved,  even  those 
things  which  appear  to  be  at  variance  with  these  attributes,  may  be 
made  to  harmonize  with  them. 

III.  3.  See  Flatt's  Letters,  "  Uber  den  moralischen  Erkennt- 
nitzgrund  in  der  Religion,"  (p.  76.)  "  The  perfect  harmony  be- 


^  28.]  THE  DIVINE  UNITY.  225 

tween  morality  and  happiness,  does  not  indeed  prove  an  absolute 
numerical  unity  in  the  Author  of  the  worlds  but  it  does  prove  a 
perfect  unity  of  design." 

III.  4.  Jacobi  says  ^*  No  one  has  yet  proved,  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble that  several  necessary  and  eternal  beings  should  possess  creative 
power,  and  should  have  produced  and  governed  this  world  in  com- 
mon." But  whatever  want  of  evidence  may  attend  the  supposition 
which  reason  makes:  that  there  is  only  one  God ;  it  cannot  be  per- 
fectly supplied  in  any  other  manner,  than  by  the  declarations  of 
God  himself.  Hence  it  is  not  strange,  that  the  unity  of  God  should 
be  entirely  denied,  or  at  least  greatly  adulterated,  by  those  nations 
which  had  not  even  a  traditional  knowledge  of  divine  revelation. 

Kant,  in  his  work  entitled,  "  Religion  within  the  limits  of  mere 
reason,"  (p.  179,)  asserts  that  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God,  was 
not  so  very  important  a  superiority  of  the  Jewish  religion  over  the 
religions  of  other  nations.  In  refutation  of  this  assertion,  it  is  re- 
marked, in  the  dissertation  in  Flatt's  Magizine  (Pt.  3.  p.  131  etc., 
entitled,  "  An  apology  for  the  Mosaic  Religion,")  that  the  religious 
history  of  the  polytheistic  nations,  most  clearly  proves  the  contrary 
to  be  true.  "  Polytheism"  (Ewald  justly  remarks)  "  has  a  neces- 
sary and  unavoidable  tendency  to  lead  the  human  mind  into  other 
errors;  as  is  clearly  evinced  by  the  history  of  man.  The  idea  of 
deity,  wherever  it  was  not  raised  to  monotheism,  always  became 
more  and  more  gross.  One  deity  was  conceived  as  differing  from 
another ;  and  consequently  they  were  not  all  viewed  as  perfect  pat- 
terns of  every  moral  and  other  excellence ;  some  were  necessarily 
represented  as  lacking  in  morality  and  perfection  ;  in  short,  the  idea 
of  God,  was  depressed  to  the  level  of  humanity,  and  was  debased  by 
human  passions."  "  Moreover,  the  principle  of  unity,  is  manifestly  a 
principle  which  our  reason  approves.  In  every  science,  reason 
searches  for  some  one  fundamental  principle. — She  requires  one  first 
cause,  one  ideal  of  perfection,  one  supreme  lawgiver.  And  when- 
ever reason  has  to  content  herself  with  plurality,  as  the  ultimate  and 
absolute  in  any  thing  ;  she  feels  that  she  has  not  yet  attained  a  rest- 
ing place:  the  innate  demands  of  reason  are  not  satisfied." 

The  arguments  by  which  Steger  has  attempted  to  prove,  that 
Moses  did  not  teach  the  unity  of  God,  admit  of  a  satisfactory  reply. 
See,  in  opposition  to  them,  Staudlin's  Lehrbuch  der  dogmatik,  p. 
199  etc.  and  Jahn's  Biblical  Archaeology,  Pt.  III.  «§>  14,  where  it  is 
proved,  that  Moses  did  not  teach  the  existence  of  merely  a  national 
God. 

III.  5.     Among  the  texts  which  assert  the  unity  of  God,  are  the 
following:  Deut.  4:  35,39,  'W%i2  liy  'J'^N  t3%7>»r7  iK^H  rt'jrt^  Je- 
29 


226  OP  GOD.  [bk.  II. 

hovab,  he  is  God,  and  there  is  not  another  beside  him.  v.  39, 

Jehovah,  he  is  God, "in 'the  heavens  above'and  upon  the  earth  be- 
neath, there  is  no  other.  Deut.  32:  39  t]\YrN  yii}  ii^n  "^z^  '':fi« 
t^-BV  I,  I  am  he,  and  there  is  no  God  with  me^  Is.  44:  6.  45:  5,  6, 
14,^21,22.  46:9.  Psalm  86:  10.  John  11:  S,  ^tovog  dkrjxJivog 
■&e6s  the  only  true  God.  John  5:  44,  na^a  lou  ^ovov  Oiov  from  the 
only  God.  Rom.  3:  29,  30.  1  Tim.  2:  5.  Comp.  James  2:  19.  I 
Tim.  1:  17,  {.lovoi  -O^fco.  Jude  25,  and  1  Cor.  8:  4 — 6,  ovdeig  '&{og 
etegog,  el  fi7]  eU — (h  x^^eog  u  Tjari^g  «|  ov  id  navtu  there  is  no  other 
God  but  one — one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom  are  all  things. 

In  the  work  on  "  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  and  epistles  of  John," 
§  95,  it  is  remarked,  that  the  context  of  John  17:  3,  and  1  Cor.  8: 
4 — 6,  proves,  that  God  the  Father  is  denominated  the  only  true 
God,  in  opposition  to  the  false  deities  of  the  heathen.  In  the  first 
passage  (v.  2)  the  phrase  naaa  Gocy'^  all  flesh,  refers  to  this  contra- 
distinction ;  and  in  the  second  passage,  it  is  expressly  mentioned. 

III.  6.  Is.  44:  8,  "^ni'^^-i^s  ^^2£  ]^i<  '^  There  is  no  other  Being 
beside  myself  in  whom  unbounded  confidence  can  be  reposed,  I  know 
none."  43:  10,  bN  -i:2i3-fi^b  ''asb  N=)n  "'s^?.  I  am  he,  before  me  there 
was  no  God  formed.  44:  24,i>p_h''^in^  D-JTaTlJ  nt23  bb  nii5':s>  r^'l'n''^  '^:?ift$ 
•^i<73  7'^i^n  I  am  Jehovah  who  made  all  things,  who  stretched  out 
the  heavens  by  myself,  who  spread  abroad  the  earth  by  myself. 

III.  7.  Deut.  6:  4,  nhN  MilT;  T^-^ribN  ?i':;n";  Jehovah  our  God  is 
one  Jehovah.  This  is  a  figure  of  speech  in  which  the  subject  of 
the  proposition  is  repeated  in  the  predicate,  as  is  the  case  in  John 
3:  31  ;  and  it  may  be  explained  by  Is.  45:  5, 6,  18.  In  these  vers- 
es, the  words  "Ti^  ]•'^^^  nin";  "•:«  "  I  (he  is  called  Jehovah,  v.  1,3, 
18)  am  Jehovah,  and  there  is  no  other  Jehovah."  The  name  Je- 
hovah, here  used  as  the  predicate  of  Jehovah,  designates  the  great- 
ness of  Jehovah  ;  by  virtue  of  which  he  is  able  to  foretell  and  to 
perform  such  great  things  (v.  1 — 3,  7,  19 — 21),  and  to  be  the  Cre- 
ator of  the  heavens  and  the  earth  (v.,  18),  which  of  course  belong 
to  him  alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  whose  greatness  might  be  com- 
pared with  his.  The  proper  name  Jehovah,  is  therefore  in  this  place 
synonymous  with  the  appellative  God ;  and  the  words,  "  I  am  Je- 
hovah, there  is  no  other  Jehovah,"  signify  the  same  as  the  w^ords 
(in  V.  5) :  "  besides  me,  there  is  no  God  ;"  that  is,  no  other  is,  what 
I  Jehovah  am — the  character  of  God,  which  belongs  to  me,  is  as- 
cribable  to  no  other. 

III.  8.  Compare  Job  4:  18,  with  15:  15.  Even  spirits  of  the 
higher  orders  are  not  perfectly  pure. 


^  29»]  SELFEXISTENCE,  ETERNITY,  IMMUTABILITY,  227 


SECTION   XXIX. 

Absolute  self  existence,  eternity,  and  immutability  of  God, 

As  God  does  not  derive  liis  existence  from  any  other  being,  he 
must  have  "  his  life  within  himself," — Coji^v  ty^si  Iv  iavtM  John  5: 
26.  This  life  in  himself,  is  nothing  else  than  his  absolutely  neces- 
sary existence  ;(1)  which  renders  it  impossible  that  his  existence 
should  terminate,(2)  or  that  his  power  should  be  diminished,  or  any 
change  in  him  occur,(3)  or  that  his  existence  should  have  had  a  be- 
ginning ;(4)  in  short,  which  renders  him  eternal. (5) 

Illustration  1. 

The  absolutely  necessary  existence  of  God. 

1  Tim.  6:  16  o  fi6i>og  iyjov  dOuvaolav  who  alone  has  immortali- 
ty. The  immortality  here  ascribed  to  God  exclusively,  must  be 
something  different  from  that  immortality  which  belongs  to  all  ra- 
tional beings  ;  it  must  denote  the  absolute  necessity  of  his  existence, 
such  an  existence  as  not  only  will  never  terminate,  but  which  con- 
tinues necessarily,  and  on  account  of  this  necessity  neither  had  a 
beginning  nor  will  have  an  end  ;  in  a  word,  an  eternal  life  ^wrj 
cciojviog  I  John  5:  20.  1:  2.  Comp.  v.  1.  John  1:  1 — 3.  But  as 
absolute  immortality  belongs  to  God  exclusively,  it  follows  that  the 
spirits  whom  God  has  created,  are  not  necessarily  immortal  ;  but  as 
they  began  to  exist,  so  they  may  cease  to  exist,  if  their  Creator,  on 
whose  will  they  are  dependent,  should  not  wish  their  existence  to 
continue. 

That  the  word  aiojvtog,  in  the  phrase  ^w^  aiojviog  1  John  5:  20, 
refers  not  only  to  future  existence  or  immortality,  but  also  to  past 
existence,  eternal  preexistence  ;  appears  from  1  John  I:  \,o^v  an 
agx^^}  which  is  equivalent  to  iv  dgxri  John  1:  1,  i.  e.  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  world,  before  all  creatures  (John  1:  3),  from  eternity 
(Is.  43:  13  in  LXX).  See  the  "  Object  of  St.  John,"  p.  385. 
Note,  p.  437  etc. 

III.  2.  Ps.  102:  25,  27,  28,  J>i^n  ^N  :'l''nia-J^  tzi-^^il  ni^a 
;  17315"'.  fi<b  T»r!i3\p^  throughout  eternity  are  thy  years — thou  art  (he) 
the  same,  and  thy  years  shall  not  terminate.  Deut^.  32:  40,  '^DbN'^n 
fibi^b  I  live  forever.  Dan.  12:  7.  Rev.  10:  6,  ^6iv  dg  tovg  alcavug 
tcHp  al(av(av  living  forever  and  ever. 


228  OF  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

III.  3.  Ps.  102:  27,  28,  fi<^n  nm  '^^732.;n  nm  thou  shall  endure 
— thou  art  the  same.  This  imniutabihty  of  the  essence  and  attri- 
butes of  God,  renders  the  itiimutability  of  his  purposes  the  more 
certain  (<§>  26). 

On  account  of  the  immutability  and  indestructibihty  ofhis  nature^ 
God  is  called  aqd^agiog  incorruptible,  Rom.  1:  23.  1  Tim.  1:  17. 

III.  4.  Ps.  90:  2,  ^JJ  Tim  t:l:i5?-ny  abi:?^.  from  eternity  to  eter- 
nity thou  art  God. 

III.  5.  Rom.  1:  20,.  cudiog  aviav  dvmfAig  xai  ■&H6in9  his  eter« 
nal  power  and  Godhead. 


SECTION    XXX. 


IncomparaMe  excellence  or  injlnity  of  the  divine  attributes. 

As  the  highest  excellences  by  which  other  beings  are  distinguish- 
ed, must  be  regarded  as  nothing,  in  comparison  with  the  divine 
attributes ;  God  is  termed  the  incomparable  One  (sanctus,  uyiogy 
uinij?  ;(1)  or  he  is  the  being  who  is  separate  from  all  other  beings, 
(2)  and  who  cannot  be  compared  to  any  other.(3)  This  incompara- 
ble excellence,  which  philosophers  and  divines  have  denominated 
the  infinity{4)  or  the  boundless  perfection  of  Gody(5)  refers  to  his 
holiness,(6)  his  3ustice,(7)  his  power,,(8)  and  in  short,  to  each  di- 
vine perfection.  If  applied  to  his  power,  it  is  termed  omnipotence ; 
(9)  if  to  his  knowledge,  omniscience. (10)  Both  are  included  in  the 
expression,  omnipresence. (11)  And  on  account  of  his  in6nite  good- 
ness, he  is  called  the  blessed  God  (ftaitdgiog  \>6og  1  Tim.  1:  11.  6: 
15,)  who  needs  the  aid  of  no  other,  because  he  is  self  existent,  (all 
things  depending  on  him,(  1 2)  and  the  sum  and  substance  of  all 
grace)  nccaa  /«(;*?  1  Pet.  5:  10,)  and  love  liseli  ccyanii  1  John  4:  8, 
16  (13.) 

Illustration  I. 

Is.  6:  3,  nifi<n5£  Siin";  '^j^np^  Uiiip/iJinp,  holy,  holy,  holy  is  Je- 
hovah of  hosts'.  "  Ezek".  38:  23,  Tiii'rpnn  "  I  have  proved  myself 
the  incomparable  One."  Ps.  22:  4.'  99: *3,  5,  9.   111:9  (here  the 


<5>  30.]  THE  DIVINE  INCOMPARABILITY.  229 

predicate  J^'lia  is  placed  with  '^i'lp,  as  in  Ps.  99:  3)  Rev.  4:  8, 
ayiog,  ciyiog,  ayiog  ^vQiog  6  d^eog  6  jiavTOxgccicDQ  holy,  holy,  holy, 
Lord  God  Almighty. 

III.  2.  1  Tim.  6:  16,  (pojg  oixcoi/  angoatvovj  oV  ddev  ovdilg 
OLp&Qwnoiv,  ovdi  idiiv  duvaiai  dwelling  in  inaccessible  light,  whom 
no  man  hath  seen  or  can  see.  1  Tim.  6;  16.  (*iii"J|?,  according  to  its 
primitive  import,  as  is  known,  signifies,  *'  to  separate  a  thing  from 
others.") 

III.  3.  Ex.  15:  11,  iiiri*:  In'z'a^D  ^a  who  is  like  thee,  Jehovah  ? 
Ps.  77:  14,  ti\7V^<:?.  bil^^  ^N-"^»  who  is  so  great  a  God  as  thou  God 
art?  Is.  40:  25,  u^iljj  'ittN'^  ^'tP^.]  '''^^^^.^,  ""^."^^  "  to  whom  will 
you  compare  me  ?"  whom  shall'  1  resemble  ?  saith  the  holy  One, 
•»i;ilp.i  See  also,  on  this  incomparableness  of  God,  the  following 
passages  :^  Ps.  86:  8— 10.  89:  7—9.  113:  5.  148:  13.  The  ex- 
pression dyioT^jg  Tov  deov  Heb.  12:  10,  seems  also  to  signify  the 
superior  perfections  of  God,  in  general ;  as  well  his  happiness  as 
his  moral  perfection.  Vide  Comm.  in  loc.  note  n. 

III.  4.  Ps.  145:  3,  "ij^ri  'j-'N  ^^^l^b — LXX,  xn?  ^^yaXcDGvptig 
avTOv  ovx  ioTL  ntQag-  his  greatness  is  unsearchable — has  no  end. 

III.  5.  In  Job  11:  7 — the  immensity  of  God  is  represented  in  a 
poetic  manner,  according  to  height,  depth,  length,  and  breadth.^ 

III.  6.  1  Pet.  1:  15,  16,  ciyiot  yivea&e/oTi,  eyoj  ccyiog  eifiv  be  ye 
holy,  because  I  am  holy.  As  all  the  attributes  of  God,  and  espe- 
cially his  holiness,  are  distinguished  from  the  characteristics  of  all 
other  beings,  by  their  greatness  and  elevation ;  so  also  should  that 
people,  whom  he  has  separated  from  others,  {yivog  axXextov,  t&vog 
ciyiov,  a  chosen  generation,  a  peculiar  people  1  Pet.  2:  9,)  be  dis- 
tinguished from  others  by  their  lives  and  principles,  Lev.  20:  22, 
23  ;  so  that  the  people  of  God  may  be  distinguished  from  others, 
not  only  by  the  enjoyment  of  the  divine  blessing  (v.  24,)  but  also 
by  their  conduct ;  or  that  they  may  be  a  peculiar  people,u:^^|?  v.  26. 

III.  7.  Is.  5:  16,  ^J>"\^'2.  ui-^p.i  uJi^pri  bijii  God  who  is  holy, 
shall  be  sanctified  in  righteousness. 

III.  8.     Ps.   17:  14.  comp.  with  v.   12,  13.     Ps.  98:  1,  ii^T 

'  Michacilis  has  elucidated  the  meaning  of  »inp,  in  a  very  appropriate  manner, 
by  the  phrase  of  Horace  :  "  Nil  habens  simile  ^  vel  secundum."  Supplem.  ad 
Lex.  Heb. 

2  The  immensity  of  God,  is  that  attribute  of  his  greatness,  which  consists  in 
its  sustaining  no  relation  to  any  known  measure  or  standard  ; — his  infinity  signi- 
fies, that  no  divine  perfection  will  admit  of  comparison  with  any  finite  excellence. 
Sec  CarUs'  Religionsphilosophie,  S.  284. 


230  OP  GOD.  [bK.  II. 

iu^lj?  his  holy  arm.  1  Pet.  3:  14,  15.  "  Be  not  afraid  of  your  ene- 
mies, but  honour  God  so  much,  as  to  believe  him  more  powerful 
and  terrible,  than  the  most  terrible  enemies,"  aytdaaie  lov  '&60v  iv 
7a7g  xagdiaig  vfA(ov  sanctify  the  Lord  in  your  hearts.  Luke  1:  49, 
inoiTjGi  f^ot  fie'yakua  6  dvvarog,  xal  uycov  to  ovofia  amou  he  that  is 
mighty  hath  done  wonders  for  me,  and  venerable  is  his  name. 

III.  9.  As  God  is  subject  to  no  other  being,  and  as  no  being 
can  be  compared  to  him  in  any  perfection  (<§.  28  ;)  it  follows,  that 
no  one  can  resist  his  supreme  and  all-controlling  power,  Is.  43:  13. 
John  10:  29.  Rom.  8:  31,  35  etc.  1  Cor.  15:  27.  And  hence 
nothing  is  impossible  with  God  ;  Gen.  18:  14.  Luke  1:  37.  Jer.  32. 
27.  Mark  10:  27,  and  he  doth  whatsoever  he  will.  Is.  46:  10  etc. 
n^5;j<'^irDh-^3T  D^pn  "^n^y  -|73'n  saying,  my  purpose  shall  stand, 
and  I  will  accomplish  all  my  pleasure.  Ps.  135:  6.  115:  3.  Eph.  1: 
11 J  Ttai/Tu  ivsgycjv  xatcc  t-^v  ^ovXrjv  lou  O^eXi^fAaiog  airou  working 
all  things  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.  And  the  power 
of  God  is  the  more  unlimited,  because  in  the  formation  and  govern- 
ment of  the  world,  he  is  not  a  mere  artificer,  whose  wishes  could  be 
controlled  by  the  nature  of  the  preexistent  matter  ;  but  is  a  proper 
Creator,  who  by  his  fiat  gave  existence  to  both  the  matter  and  the 
form  of  the  world.  This  boundlessness  of  the  divine  power,  which 
makes  all  creation  dependant  solely  on  the  divine  will,  and  by  vir- 
tue of  which  he  actually  created  this  world  by  his  will ;  is  described 
in  the  following  passages  :  Ps.  33:  9,  comp.  v.  6.  Rev.  4:  11.  Jer. 
23:  17. 

III.  10.  That  God  has  a  knowledge,  not  only  of  all  those  pos- 
sible things  which  shall  actually  occur  (*§>  22.  Illust.  11,)  but  also 
of  all  those  possible  things  which  never  did  or  will  take  place  ; — or 
in  other  words,  that  God  possesses  scientiam  mediam  (scientiam 
simplicis  intelligentiae,)  is  taught  by  the  following  passages  :  Jer. 
38:  17—20.  1  Sam.  23:  11—13.  Matt.  11:  21—23. 

III.  11.  A  being  is  said  to  be  omnipresent,  whose  agency  and 
knowledoje  extend  to  every  place,  or  are  confined  to  no  particular 
place.  To  the  universal  agency  of  God,  the  following  passages  re- 
fer :  Amos  9:  2  etc.  Acts  17:  27,  28,  ov  ^angav  dno  ivog  ixdarov 
i^fiwp  vndgxfi' '  Iv  ctJrw  yug  ^oj^iv  xat  xivovf^ed^a  nal  iofxev  hs  is  not 
far  from  each  one  of  us ;  for  in  him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our 
being.  And  his  omniscience  is  alluded  to  in  Ps.  139:  6 — 12.  Jer. 
23:23.  That  God  is  not  circumscribed  or  limited  by  place  or 
space,  is  taught  in  1  Kings  8:  27,  l^^"^^^,  ^"b  t3':72UJn  '^Q'^T  Ct^'^^^j 
the  heavens  and  the  heavens  of  heavens  cannot  contain  thee.  Is.  i 
66:  1.  John  4:  20 — 24.     We  however,  are  notable  to  comprehend i 


<5>  30.]  ALL  THINGS  DEPEND  ON  GOD.  231 

the  relation  which  the  substance  of  God  bears  to  the  objects  which 
he  beholds,  or  on  which  he  exerts  his  agency.  Nor  ought  we  to  be 
surprised  at  this  incomprehensibility ;  for  we  are  unable  to  compre- 
hend the  mode  of  the  presence  even  of  a  human  soul  ;  and  can  on- 
ly infer  that  presence,  from  its  agency,  and  the  appearances  man- 
ifested at  a  particular  place  ;  without  knowing  any  thing  of  the 
mode  of  that  presence  which  belongs  to  the  unknown  substance  of  a 
spiritual  being.  Compare  Michaelis'  Dogmatik,  <§>  39.  p.  174.  and 
Reinhard's  Dogmatik,  «§>  36.  p.  115. 

III.  12.     All  things  dependent  on  God. 

Rom.  11:  34 — 36,  tig  ccvtov  ra  ndvt a  to  him  are  all  things.  Acts 
17  :  25,  ov  nooadeofjievoi  rivog^  aviog  didovg  naat  ^wt^v  xal  nvotjv  xat, 
ta  Tiavia  he  doth  not  need  any  thing,  he  giveth  unto  all,  life  and 
breath  and  all  things. 

As  God  alone  possesses  an  absolutely  necessary  existence  («5>  29, 
Illust.  1,)  it  follows  that  the  existence  of  all  other  things  is  a  de- 
pendent existence  ;  and  as  there  is  no  necessary  cause  of  the  exist- 
ence of  things,  at  which  reason  is  obliged  to  stop,  excepting  God ; 
it  appears  that  the  existence  of  all  things  depends  ultimately  on  God, 
John  1:  1,  2.  And  he  is  the  Creator,  not  only  of  living  creatures, 
but  also  of  inanimate  objects  ;  in  a  word,  he  is  the  Creator  of  all 
things  (Illust.  9.)  Now,  the  more  independent  God  is,  and  the 
more  unlimited  his  power  over  all  things,  considered  as  being  his 
property  in  the  strictest  sense ;  the  greater^  should  be  that  rever- 
ence with  which  we  should  adore  his  free  bounty  and  unmerited 
patience,  long  suffering,  and  forbearance  f  1  John  4:  10,  19,  amog 
TiQMTog  riyamiasv  infjiag  he  first  loved  us.  Rom.  9:  22,  noXlri  ^ungo- 
'&vfiia — nXoviog  xfjg  do^ijg  inl  nxevt]  iXiovg  much  long  suffering — the 
riches  of  his  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy.  On  this  passage,  see 
the  second  Dissertation  on  the  epistles  to  the  Col.  and  Phil.  Note 
165. 

III.  13.      1    Pet.   5:  10,  6  Oiog  naorig  x^gcrog  the  God  of  all 

grace  :  this  properly  stands  for  o  ^eog  og  iatt  nana  /dgig  the  God 
who  is  all  grace,  Deus  clementissimus.  Vide  Observv.  ad  analogiam 
et  syntaxin  Ebraicam,  p.  234.  In  the  passage  1  John  4:  16,  the 
substantive  dydnri  stands  in  the  place  of  the  superlative,  Deus  longe 
omnium  amantissimus.  Vid.  ibid.  p.  22. 

1  Job  40:  3—6.  42:  6.  Rom.  9:  20  etc.  2  §  24.  Illust.  8. 


OF  txt:-    *':^. 


PART  II. 

OF    CREATION    AND    PROVIDENCE. 

SECTION  XXXI. 

Every  thing  which  exists,  was  both  as  to  matter  and  form,  produc- 
ed by  the  will  of  God. 

Agreeably  to  the  idea  of  the  divine  Being  which  has  been  already 
established  (^  20),  and  which  is  now  to  be  more  particularly  eluci- 
dated:  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth, (1)  i.  e.  the  world, 
(2)  or(3)  the  universe,(4)  all  things  visible(5)  and  invisible,  ani- 
mate^ and  inanimate  ;(6)  in  other  words,  he,  by  an  act  of  his  will, 
(7)  brought  into  existence(8)  that  which  had  no  existence,  and 
which  began  to  exist  only  because  he  willed  it,  or  only  in  conse- 
quence of  the  efficiency  of  the  divine  V7ill.(9)  The  chaotic  mass, 
also,  out  of  which  our  earth^  was  formed,(10)  did  not  exist  from 
eternity, (11)  but  was  created  by  God,  was  produced  by  his  will. 

Illustration  1. 

Gen.  1:1,  V"t)fi$51  fiij?!  t]-)tt^>i  m  tJ-iribN  (titJy)  Nna  God  creat- 
ed the  heavens  and  the  earth.  Ps.  121:  2.  "102:  26.  As  the'earth 
consists  of  land  and  water,^  the  inspired  writers,  instead  of  heaven 
and  earth,  use  the  expression,  the  heavens  and  the  water  (or  sea) 
and  the  land  (or  earth);  see  Ps.  146:  6.  Acts  14:  15,  og  inoirjae 
xov  ovgapov  xai  trjv  yijv  xal  xriv  d^alaaaav^  xal  navTU  rd  Iv  avzolg 
who  made  the  heaven  and  the  earth  and  the  sea  and  all  things  in 
them  ;  compare  Rev.  10:  6.   14:  7.  Neh.  9:  6. 

III.  2.     Acts  17:  24,  6  notrioag  top  mafiov  who  made  the  world. 

III.  3.  Col.  1:  16,  xd  ndvxa  td  Iv  To7g  ov(javo7g  xal  xd  int  xrjg 
ytjg  all  things  which  are  in  the  heavens  and  on  the  earth.  Jer.  10: 
11,  12.  comp.  V.  16,  bbn— >nn  the  earth — all  things. 

111.  4.  Heb.  2:  10.  3:  4,  i'i  ov  zd  ndvxa — dt  ov  xd  ndvxci — o 
xd  ndvxa  xaiaaxevdaag,  &e6g  he  from  whom  are  all  things — by 
whom  are  all  things  ; — he  who  formed  all  things,  is  God.  comp.  1 
Cor.  8:  6.  Rom.  11:  36. 


1  John  1:  4.  §  30.  Illust.  12.  2  Gen.  1;  2.  v.  3.  3  Gen.  1:  9  etc. 


§  31.]  CREATION.  233 

III,  5.  Col.  1:  16,  icc  ogaici  xal  zd  dogaTu  things  visible  and 
things  invisible. 

III.  6.  John  1:  3,  ;fO)^/?  avrov  lytvno  ovde  iV,  6  yf'yove  without 
him  was  nothing  made  which  was  made. 

Note.  In  the  work,  ''  Uber  den  Zweck  Johannis,"  (p.  183 
etc.),  it  is  remarked,  that  the  words  xoi9^^~y^yovev  would  be  a  su- 
perfluous supplement  to  navra  dc  amov  iyei^eto,  if  they  were  not 
directed  against  a  party  of  Gnostics,  who  regarded  God  as  the  crea- 
tor of  only  the  invisible  world,  whilst  they  ascribed  the  creation  of 
the  visible  world  (xdafiog  verse  10),  to  another  power  unacquainted 
with  God. 

III.  7.  Psalm  33:  6,  nin":  "inns  by  the  word  of  Jehovah,  v.  9, 
nbi>^T  t<\:i  «in  \^.;i  -laN  i^iri  he  spake  and  it  existed,  he  com- 
manded and  it  stood  there'.  Is.  48:  13,  nn:^  ^n^y;  t:^■'^.^{  "^a.N  N^lp 
when  I  call  unto  them,  they  stand  up  together.  Thus,  in  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  11:3,  the  word  ^inn  (Gen.  1:1)  is  explained  as 
denoting  a  production  by  the  word  of  will  of  God,  Qiq^aiv  ■&eov' 
and  in  Rev.  4:  11,  did  to  -^ihifid  gov  eiot  (id  ndnTu),  xul  sxTia&f]- 
<fav  by  thy  will  (all  things)  are,  and  were  created,  or,  "  in  conse- 
quence of  thy  will,  all  things  came  into  existence  or  were  created;" 
the  signification  here  given  to  xa/,  is  its  signification  in  Luke  12:  38 
comp.  Mark  13:  35.  James  4:  13,  GrifAegov  xal  avgtov  to  day  or  to- 
morrow. It  is  true,  we  cannot  comprehend  the  mode  of  the  divine 
agency  in  creation,  or  the  nature  of  the  creative  will.  But  even 
the  imperfect  idea  of  creation,  which  at  least  excludes  a  preexistent 
matter  and  all  external  auxiliary  means,  and  ascribes  the  incompre- 
hensible work  of  creation  to  God  alone,  is  of  great  importance  to 
us.  Compare  <§»  30.  Illust.  9,  12. 

III.  8.  Heb.  11:3,  ftg  to  jujJ  ix  (faifOf^evoDv  ra  phnofitva  yey- 
ove'pat  so  that  the  things  which  we  see,  were  not  formed  out  of 
any  thing  preexistent.  The  same  thing  is  thus  expressed  in  2 
Mace.  7:  28,  H  ovy,  ovtwv  inoirjoev  avid  {tov  ovgavov  aai  Ttjv  yrjv) 
0  d^iog.  In  this  case,  cpatvofifva  is  equivalent  to  ovtu  ;  for  as  there 
existed  nothing  except  God,  which  could  see  or  know,  q)atv6f*6vu 
must  signify  something  which  was  visible  to  him  (God),  and  con- 
sequently the  sense  must  be  this  :  God  did  not  create  the  world  out 
of  any  thing. 

See  Comment,  on  Heb.  11:  3,  Note  e. 

III.  9.     Gen.  1:  1,  "  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth  in 

the  beginning ;"  i.  e.  when  he  created  the  world,  there  was  a  be- 

I  ginning  made  to  every  thing  except  God.  John  1 :  1 — 3,  ndvTaiyt- 

30 


234  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

vtro — 0  yhyovi  all  things  were  made — which  were  made.  John  17: 
5,  24,  TiQQ  Tov  101/  Kooidov  elvat, — ttqo  Kazafiokijg  xoGfiov  before  the 
world  was, — before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  and  Eph.  1:  4.  1 
Pet.  1:  20.  Ps.  90:  2. 

III.  10.  If  we  suppose  that  the  formation  of  the  earth  is  repre- 
sented (Gen.  1:  2)  as  the  formation  out  of  a  mass  of  preexistent 
matter,  we  must  nevertheless  regard  this  formation,  not  as  the  natu- 
ral operation  of  the  preexistent  mass  ;  on  the  contrary,  it  was  the 
effect  of  the  same  creative  will,  or  omnipotence,  by  which  God  had 
previously  created  the  heavens  and  the  chaotic  mass  out  of  which 
our  earth  was  formed.  Gen.  1:3,6,9,  11,14,20,  24,  ^J2ii^_ 
^"•m''^.  and  God  said  ;  compare  with  Ps.  33:  6,  nnrT;-"ii12  by  the 
word  of  Jehovah. 

Note.  In  the  Dissertation  on  the  "  Object  of  the  death  of  Je- 
sus," appended  to  the  Comment,  on  Hebrews,^  it  is  said :  "  In  the 
formation  of  the  earth,  whatever  God  willed,  instantly  existed  just 
as  he  wished  it.  The  interval  between  the  production  of  things  in 
the  beginning  of  one  day,  and  the  production  of  others  at  the  com- 
mencement of  another,  only  facilitated  to  spectators  (the  superior 
spirits),  the  discrimination  and  contemplation  of  the  divine  works. 
To  these  spirits,  who  could  not  possibly  have  been  spectator  of  the 
production  of  their  own  world  and  themselves  ;  the  truth,  that  God 
is  the  author  of  every  thing  which  exists,  would  be  presented  in  the 
most  visible  and  distinct  manner,  by  the  gradual  formation  of  the 
earth  before  their  eyes.  The  earth,  which  they  first  beheld  "  with- 
out form  and  void,"  in  a  short  time  appeared  before  their  eyes 
clothed  in  magnificence.  And  as  it  did  not  at  once  arrive  at  this 
state,  but  during  successive  portions  of  time  ;  they  could  the  more 
easily  perceive  and  contemplate  the  principal  kinds  of  excellence 
which  the  omnipotent  will  of  the  Creator  gradually  bestowed  on 
this  work  of  his  ;  and  by  comparing  each  successive  state  of  the 
earth  with  that  which  immediately  preceded  it,  they  could  appre- 
ciate the  peculiar  value  of  every  successive  exertion  of  the  divine 
will,  and  the  suitableness  of  every  new  arrangement ;  and  thus  be- 
come the  more  firmly  convinced  of  the  wisdom  of  all  the  arrange- 
ments of  God  in  the  other  world,"  Com  p.  §  32.  lllust.  4. 

These  remarks  may  serve  as  a  refutation  of  the  objections,  which 
those  who  regard  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  creation  as  a  mytholo- 
gical or  allegorical  narrative,  or  as  a  philosophical  speculation,  urge 
against  the  literal,  historical  interpretation  of  it.  A  collection  of  the 
principal  views  which  have  been  entertained  of  the  Mosaic  narrative 
of  the  creation,  together  with  the  arguments  for  and  against  them, 

1  P.  621  etc. 


^  31.]  CREATION. 


235 


is  contained  in  "  Eichhorn's  Urgeschichte,"  edited  by  Gabler,  with 
potes  and  an  Introduction,  II  parts  in  3  vols.  1790—92.  compare 
(Bauer's)  "  Theology  of  the  Old  Testament,"  Leipsic,  1796,  <5> 
64—66.     They  may  be  reduced  to  the  following : 

1 .  The  Mosaic  account  of  the  creation  is  a  real  and  true  history, 
which  must  be  interpreted  in  a  more  or  less  literal  manner. 

2.  It  is  not  a  true  and  real  history  ;  but 

(a)  A  historical  fable.  In  refutation  of  this  opinion,  see  Ewald's 
Religionslehre  der  Bibel,  Vol.  I.  p.  147,  and  Bauer's  Hebra- 
ische  Mythologie,  B.  I.  S.  67 — 76. 

(b)  A  philosophem— the  reflections  of  some  ancient  sage.  On 
this  view  of  the  subject,  see  Ziegler's  Critique  on  the  dogma 
of  creation,  in  Henke's  Mag.  Vol.  II.  and  Bauer's  Hebrew 
Mythology,  Vol.  I.  p.  63  etc.  Staiidlin's  Lehrbuch  der  Dog- 
matik. 

(c)  An  allegory,  poesy,  a  figurative  representation.  See  Teller's 
Aelteste  Theodicee,  and  Ewald,  ubi  supra,  p.  133  etc. 

In  opposition  to  the  hypothesis  of  Eichhorn,  (advanced  in  Ur- 
gesch.  in  Repertor.  for  Biblical  and  Oriental  Literature,  Pt.  4),  that 
the  account  of  the  creation,  is  a  fiction  of  Moses,  made  for  the  pur- 
pose of  recommending  in  a  sensible  manner,  the  sanctification  of  the 
Sabbath  or  Seventh  day  ;  we  find  the  following  remarks,  in  the 
"  Dissert,  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,"  (p.  623  etc.)  : 
"  Such  a  holy  fraud  militates  against  the  accredited  authority  of  a 
divine  messenger. — It  would  have  cast  suspicion  on  the  authority  of 
Moses,  and  could  not  have  answered  the  intended  purpose  ;  for  it 
was  only  the  belief  in  the  divine  authority  of  Moses,  which  could, 
in  the  view  of  the  Israelites,  have  imparted  the  sanction  of  a  divine 
institution  to  the  law  relative  to  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath." 

And  in  answer  to  the  objections  to  the  literal  interpretation  of 
Gen.  ch.  1  :  "  how  could  the  succession  of  day  and  night  be  effect- 
ed, prior  to  the  fourth  day,  on  which  the  relation  between  the  sun 
and  our  earth,  was  first  established  ;  and  how  could  vegetation  have 
taken  place  on  the  third  day,  without  the  solar  heat?"  it  is  remark- 
ed in  the  same  work  :  "  It  was  not  necessary  that  the  light  which 
caused  the  distinction  between  day  and  night,  should  have  proceed- 
ed from  the  sun  ;— and  for  the  productions  of  the  vegetable  king- 
dom, the  omnipotence  of  God  required  not  the  influence  of  the  solar 
rays." 

III.  11 .  We  have  no  occasion  to  deny,  that  when  our  earth  was 
formed,  together  with  the  rest  of  the  universe,  (Gen.  1:1),  though 
for  the  particular  reasons  the  whole  was  irini  =]rin  Gen.  1:2;  yet 
the  mass  forthwith  received  the  particular  form  and  structure  which 
is  described  Gen.  1:  3  etc.     In  other  words,  we  may  well  admit 


236  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bk.  II. 

that  the  creation  of  the  chaotic  mass,  preceded  its  formation  into  a 
world,  by  an  imperceptibly  brief  space  of  time.  Compare  Gen.  2: 
1 — 4.  Ex.  20:  11,  where  the  formation  of  the  earth  and  the  cre- 
tion  of  the  universe  are  combined.  With  regard  to  God,  who  has 
happiness  within  himself,  and  is  independent  of  all  things  without 
himself;  it  is  immaterial  whether  we  date  the  existence  of  the  world, 
earlier  or  later.^  And  as  for  the  arguments  derived  from  particular 
productions  of  nature,  in  favor  of  the  extreme  antiquity  of  our  earth  ; 
— they  by  no  means  establish  the  point  in  support  of  which  they 
are  adduced ;  because  neither  the  causes  of  these  productions  nor  the 
length  of  time  requisite  for  their  formation,  can  be  certainly  deter- 
mined ;  and  the  hypotheses  formed  on  this  subject,  have  no  author- 
ity, being  merely  the  conjectures  of  the  strenuous  advocates  of  the 
extreme  antiquity  of  the  earth. 


SECTION   XXXII. 

Mediate  creation. 


God  must  also  be  regarded  as  the  mediate  Creator(l)  of  all  those 
things  which  are  generated  by  others ;  because  he  created  all  the 
creatures  and  things  which  propagate,  and  he  endowed  them  with 
the  power  of  propagation,  for  the  very  purpose  that  they  should 
bring  forth  ''  after  their  kind. "(2)  In  like  manner,  God  is,  proper- 
ly speaking,  the  source  from  which  all  living  creatures  derive  the 
good  which  flows  to  them  through  the  medium  of  their  fellow  crea- 
tures. (3)  For  from  God  all  creatures  derive  their  powers,  which 
were  bestowed  on  them  with  a  view(4)  to  their  promoting  the  hap- 
piness of  one  another.  (5)  To  God,  therefore,  our  gratitude  is  due, 
for  all  the  good  which  we  derive  from  the  powers  and  agency  of 
universal  nature. (6) 

Illustration  1. 

Acts  17:  25,  umog  dtdovg  naot  Co>»i»'  he  gave  life  to  all.  v.  28, 
Iv  ctviM  lofiiv  '*  by  him  we  were  brought  into  existence — to  him  we 
are  indebted  for  our  being.''  See  Dissert.  I,  in  Libror.  N.  T. 
lilstor.  aliquot  loca,  p.  92  ;  where  the  whole  passage  is  thus  render- 

1  Jerusalem's  ''  Meditations  etc."  Pt.  II.  p.  448  etc. 


<§>  32.]  MEDIATE  CREATION.  237 

ed  :  "  to  him  we  are  indebted  for  our  comfortable  existence  (CMfifv), 
for  the  continuance  of  our  powers  (xivovfuOa),  and  even  for  our  ex- 
istence itself  {icfitv)."  1  Tim.  4:  4  etc.  nav  xiiofiu  {)£ov  every 
creature  of  God.  Matt.  6:  30.  comp.  Heb.  2:  11,  i'i  ivog  navzeg  all 
are  of  one.  Eccl.  12:  I,  'T'i^nis  thy  Creator.  Job.  33:  4,  bN-^l"» 
•^snujy  the  Spirit  of  God  made  me.  Rev.  8:  9,  to  zglzov  rcov 
xTiOficcTCDv  the  third  part  of  the  creatures. 

III.  2.  In  Gen.  1:  28.  22:  11  etc.  it  is  said,  God  created  man 
and  animals  and  plants,  ordaining  that  they  should  perpetuate  their 
species.  And  in  Gen.  8:  17.  9:  1,  we  learn,  that  according  to  the 
divine  purpose,  this  propagation  was  to  continue  after  the  flood. 

III.  3.  Hos.  2:  21,22.  comp.  Psalm  104:  27,  28.  145: 15  etc. 
inya  Q^Dfij-riN  Dn^  ]ni]  nnN  thou  gi vest  to  them  their  food  in  its 
proper 'time.  147'  8**etc. 'l4.  Job  38:  41.  Jer.  5  :  24.  14:22. 
Matt.  5  :  45,  roV  iiXiov  aviov  dvaTilkei—xat  ^Qtitt  maketh  his  sun 
arise—and  sendeth  rain.  6:  25—33.  1  Tim.  6:  17,  Act^s  14:  17, 
ovgavd&ev  didovQ  vevovg  ycat  xaigovg  xaQnoq^ogovg,  ifininXfov  xQO(frig 
xat  fvcpQOGuvrjg  zag  xccgdlag  tjf^div  gave  us  rain  from  heaven  and  fruit- 
ful seasons,  filling  our  hearts  with  nourishment  and  joy.  17:  25,  didovg 
td  ndvza'  v.  28,  Iv  aviii^  ^M^ev  to  him  we  owe  it,  that  we  live  in 
prosperity  and  gladness,  see  lllust.  1. 

III.  4.  It  seems  as  if  God,  who  could  certainly  have  created  the 
world  in  an  instant,  employed  a  series  of  days  in  forming  it,  for  the 
purpose  of  conveying  to  the  angels,  (who  were  present  at  the  crea- 
tion. Job  38:  4 — 7,)  an  ocular  demonstration  of  the  wisdom  of  his 
plans  ;  and  that  the  narrative  of  it  might  be  adapted  to  our  compre- 
hension, and  yet  be  true  and  convey  to  us  distinct  and  correct  views 
of  his  designs.  Compare  <§>  31.  lllust.  10  Note. 

III.  5.  Gen.  1:  14— 17,  29  etc.  8:  22.  Ps.  104:  10—24. 
1  Tim.  4:  3.  §QOifiuxa  ao  Oeog  tKivasv  dg  iiezdXrixpvv  meats  which 
God  created  to  be  received. 

^  III.  6.  1  Tim.  4:  3  etc.  1  Cor.  lOj  26,  30  etc.  Rom.  14:  6. 
0  ia&l(0Vy  nvQico  la&Uo^  fv^otQiozei  ydg  rw  &iM  he  that  eateth,  eateth 
to  the  Lord,  for  he  giveth  thanks  to  God.  1:  20.  Psalm  104:  1, 33 
etc.  147:  7. 


SECTION   XXXIII. 

Preservation  of  the  world. 

We  are  the  more  indebted  to  God  for  the  powers  and  properties 
of  nature,  and  for  the  benefits  we  derive  from  them ;  because  the 


238  CREATION.  [bK.  II. 

world,  even  when  created,  cannot  support  itself,  but  is  upheld  by 
him  who  formed  it.(l)  For  the  creatures  could  not  continue  in  ex- 
istence and  be  active,  if  God  did  not  will  their  continuance  in  being, 
and  their  retention  of  those  powers  by  which  they  act.  (Ps.  104: 29. 
comp.  <5>  29.  Illust.  1.)  The  same  divine  power(2)  which  created 
the  universe,  also  upholds  it.(3) 

Illustration  1. 

All  things  belong,  in  the  most  unlimited  sense,  to  him  who 
brought  them  into  existence.  He  is  Lord  over  the  universe,  in  a 
sense  in  which  no  other  can  be  lord  over  any  thing :  Ps.  50:  10 — 12, 
J^i<b72^  ban  "^b  the  earth  belongs  to  me  and  the  fulness  of  it.  Matt. 
11:  25.  Acts  17:  24,  ovgavov  xul  yrjg  xvQiog  vna^x^^  being  Lord  of 
heaven  and  earth.  1  Cor.  8:  4 — 6,  elg  nvgiog  one  Lord. 

That  xvQtog  is  here  a  name  of  God,  denoting  his  universal  Lord- 
ship, is  proved  in  the  work  "  On  the  object  of  St.  John's  Gospel," 
p.  463,  from  the  following  considerations  :  1 .  Because  the  phrases, 
yfyofifpoi  ^601  and  ^eoi  xal  xvgtoc,  in  v.  5,  are  evidently  synony- 
mous ;  and  2.  Because  we  find,  in  v.  6,  that  ^foV  i'i  ov  rd  ndi^ia,  and 
xvgwg  di  ov  zd  navza^  are  considered  as  two  predicates  of  the  same 
import.  Comp.  did  and  in  Rom.  3:  30.  Gabler,  in  his  Theolog. 
Journal,  proves  that  xvgiog  with  and  without  the  article,  is  used  as 
well  of  God  as  of  Jesus  Christ.  Vol.  I.  p.  11. 

III.  2.  Heb.  1:  3,  compared  with  11:  3.  In  the  first  passage, 
we  find  (figcav  td  ndvra  rco  Qi^^axi  zTJg  dvvdfiscog  amov  supporting 
all  things  with  the  word  of  his  power ;  and  in  the  second,  voov^ev 
xuTijQjiad^ui  Tovg  aioivag  gti^iari  ^aov  we  know  that  the  world  was 
formed  by  the  word  of  God.  In  the  former,  the  preservation  of  the 
universe  is  ascribed  to  gri^a  &£ov'  and  in  the  latter,  creation  is  refer- 
red to  the  same  divine  atribute.  To  this  place  belongs  also  the 
text,  2  Pet.  3:  5,  yrj  i§  vdaiog  xat  di  vdazog  avveavojaa^  vro  tov  {tiov 
loyta  "the  earth  was  produced  by  the  divine  will  (Gen.  1:  9,)  out 
of  the  water  (v.  2,  9) ;  and  in  like  manner  was  preserved  by  the  di- 
vine will,  notwithstanding  the  water  (of  the  flood)."  (*^m  signifies 
notwithstanding,  m  Rom.  2:  27.  4:  11.  I  Tim.  2:  15.  and  thus  the 
Hebrew  i  is  used  Deut.  1:  32,  ^yr^  and  Ps.  78:  32,  nft^T-b:33). 

Comp.  Ps.  104^  6— 9.  Job  38:' 10,  IL—The  word  ovviaxMaa 
is  used  for  avviaxwoa  f}v^  and  has  in  this  place  a  twofold^  meaning. 
In  connexion  with  the  first  preposition  i^,  it  signifies  the  origin^  and 

1  There  are  other  instances  in  which  a  single  word  has  a  double  signification, 
and  though  but  mentioned  but  once,  stands  in  more  than  a  single  connexion  :  e. 
g.  Heb.  5:  11.  and  Tit.  2:  6,  8. 

2  On  this  signification  of  avpiazTjfu,  compare  Kypke,  on  2  Pet.  3:  5.  and 
Schleusner's  Lex.  in  voc.  No.  4. 


<§>  34.]  DIVINE  GOVERNMENT.  239 

production  of  the  earth  from  the  water ;  but  in  connexion  with  the 
second  preposition  did,  it  signifies  the  preservation^  of  the  earth, 
which  is  also  ascribed  to  the  Xoyog  Oeov  in  2  Pet.  3:  7.^ 

III.  3.  Acts  17:  25,  amog didovg naGinvoiiv — v.  28,  ^ivovfii&a 
he  gave  breath  to  all — we  move.  Both  expressions  refer  to  the 
continuance  and  preservation  of  the  natural  faculties  and  powers. 
Compare  Dissert.  I,  in  libror.  N.  Test,  aliquot  loca,  p.  92.  Col.  1: 
17,  ra  ndvta  Iv  avtco  ovvioirjite  by  him  all  things  subsist,  compar- 
ed with  Heb.  1:  3.  Neh.  9:  6,  t!>3-nJ5  n-^hx?  nm  thou  preservest 
them  all.  Gabler,  in  his  Journal  (for  1807,)  shews  that  the  pre- 
servation and  creation  of  the  world,  may  be  separated,  although  both 
are  contained  in  the  proposition  :  '*  the  entire  ground  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  world,  is  in  the  will  of  God."  "  The  same  eternal  and 
immutable  act  of  God,  is,  by  the  idea  of  creation,  referred  to  the 
origin  and  being  of  the  world  ;  and  by  the  idea  of  preservation,  to 
its  continuance." 


SECTION  XXXIV 


The  divine  government  of  the  tvorld. 
The  Lord  of  the  world,  also  governs{l)  the  world,  and  overrules 
the  various  operations  of  natural  cavises  to  the  accomplishment  of  his 
purposes.(2)  The  world  consists  partly  of  mechanical,  and  partly  of 
free  moral  agents.  As  the  latter  constitute  the  great  object  of  crea- 
tion,(3)  the  divine  government  of  the  world  consists  in  this  :  that 
God  pays  the  most  vigilant  attention  to  the  free  actions  of  all  ration- 
al beings  (§  17,)  and  that  he  governs  the  rest  of  the  world  in  a 
manner  accordant  with  the  great  moral  end  which  he  has  in  view. 
^  18.  Illust.  7. 

Illustration  1. 

Ps.  145:  13,  a-'ayy-bs  ni5^^  '^r]l5l^'3  thy  kingdom  is  an  eter- 
nal kingdom.     Ps.  66:  7,  abi^  innin"^3  b'^jQ  he  governs  by  his 

1  This  is  a  very  common  ellipsis,  which  is  derived  from  a  Hebrew  idiom,  in 
the  Observv.  ad  analogiam  et  syntaxin  Ebraicam,  p.  135  etc.  See  also  Dissert. 
II,  in  libror.  N.  T.  histor.  aliquot  loca,  p.  26. 

2  The  word  awicfTTj/ii  likewise  signifies,  to  preserve,  in  Col.  1 :  17.  See  Dissert. 
I,  in  Epist.  ad  Coloss.  Note  28.  and  Schleusner's  Lex.  sup.  cit.  No. 


240  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

power  forever.     1  Tim.  1: 17,  ^aatXfvg  toUv  ai(6vcov  Governor  of  the 
worlds.   ]  Chron.  29:  11,  12. 

Note.  In  the  Comm.  on  the  Hebrews  (ch.  1:  2.  Note  e.),  it  is 
remarked  that  ^aadevg  xmv  txiMPuv  cannot  well  signify  here,  eternal 
Governor;  because  it  would  have  been  more  natural  for  St.  Paul, 
who  places  three  adjectives  in  immediate  succession,  to  say  alwviog' 
and  because  the  predicate  eternal  is  comprehended  in  the  subse- 
quent word  oiop^aQiog.  Michaelis  remarks  that  the  Hebrew  expres- 
sion Dbiy  among  the  Rabbins,  commonly  signifies  world;  and  that 
the  plural  Q^abb,  ctlrxii/eg,  probably  originated  from  a  Rabbinical  di- 
vision of  the  world  into  upper  and  lower.  Introduction  to  N.  T. 
Pt.  n.  p.  1378,  4th  edition. 

III.  2.  Ephes.  1:11,  ivegy^v  iiavvu  xaia  Ttjv  ^ovlriv  deXTqfiaxog 
avzov.  Col.  1:  16,  ndpzcc  elg  uvtov  e^Tiarat,^  "  every  thing  is  so  con- 
stituted as  to  be  dependent  on  him ;  all  things  shall  accomplish  his 
will,  and  promote  his  honour  (his  purposes).  See  Dissert.  I,  in 
epist.  ad  Coloss.  Note  27.  Elg  aviov  is  used  in  the  same  sense,  in 
Rom.  11:  36.  1  Cor.  8:  6.  Comp.  Kypke  on  Luke  12:  21.  Koppe 
on  Rom.  11:  36.  and  Schleusner's  Lex.  voc.  sig  No.  24. 

III.  3.  When  it  is  said  that  God  exercises  a  special  or  particu- 
lar providence  over  his  rational  creatures  ;  it  is  not  supposed,  that 
his  knowledge  of  the  other  creatures  is  less  perfect,  or  that  his  at- 
tention to  them  is  less.  This  cannot  be  supposed  of  the  omniscient 
God,  Matt.  10:  29.  Luke  12:  6.  But  while  he  treats  rational  moral 
beings  according  to  the  rank  which  he  has  assigned  them  in  the 
universe,  that  is,  as  beings  of  a  nobler  species,  and  who  are  more 
nearly  related  to  himself  (yfVo?  i^fou  ;)i  he  also  treats  the  lower 
orders  of  creatures,  according  to  their  respective  ranks  and  the 
design  of  their  creation.  <§>  18.  lUust.  7.  The  providence  of  God 
over  all  created  beings  and  things,  is  termed  providentia  generalis ; 
that  over  the  human  family,  is  termed  specialis  ;  and  that  over 
those  persons  who  are  distinguished  for  virtue  and  piety,  is  called 
specialissima. 


SECTION   XXXV. 


It  is  possible  that  God  should,  by  immediate  interposition.,  suspend 
or  alter  the  course  of  nature  in  the  material  world. 

In  consequence  of  our  ignorance  of  the  interior  of  nature,  we 
1  Luke  12:  7.  Matt.  6:  26—30.  Acts  17:  28. 


^  35.]  IMMEDIATE  INTERPOSITION.  241 

cannot  determine,  whether  it  was  possible  for  God,  without  preju- 
dice to  the  freedom  of  rational  beings,  which  he  would  not  violate, 
to  adopt  such  a  constitution  of  the  world  at  the  time  of  the  creation, 
and  to  establish  the  course  of  nature  so  unalterably,  that  his  pur- 
poses would  be  fully  accomplished  by  the  agency  of  mere  natural 
causes,  and  in  the  natural  course  of  things,  without  any  interposition 
or  immediate  influence  from  him  on  the  created  world.     We  can- 
not determine,  whether  it  would  not  be  an  absolute  impossibility,  so 
to  frame  the   world,  that  every   thing  at   variance  with  the  divine 
purposes  and  the  welfare  of  his  individual  rational  creatures,  should 
be  prevented,  by  the  mere  laws  and  powers  of  mechanical  nature, 
without  any  immediate  interference  of  the  Creator ;  and  yet,  that 
the  freedom  of  rational  creatures  should  not  be  infringed,  amid  the 
various  consequences  which  may  result  from  the  influence  of  ration- 
al beings  upon  nature,  in  consequence  of  its  mere  mechanical  pow- 
ers and  laws.     We  must  at  least  admit,  that  in  those  cases  in  which 
the  adaptation  of  the  course  of  nature  to  the  moral  ends  and  the 
moral  condition  of  rational  beings,  cannot  otherwise  be  secured,  it  is 
effected  by  the  immediate  interposition  of  God.(l)    Nor  does  this 
admission  in  the  least  derogate  from  the  honour,  the  power,  or  the 
intelligence  of  God.     For  contradictory  things  are  not  subject  to 
power.(2)     And  it  is  by  no  means  necessary,  that  we  should  re- 
gard these  occasions  for  the  divine  interposition,  as  unforeseen  by 
God.     On  the  contrary,  we  must  consider  these  interpositions  as 
having  been  determined  on  from  eternity. (3)     Moreover,  such  im- 
mediate influence  of  God  on  the  course  of  nature,  does  not  suspend 
the  laws  of  nature,  although  the  course  of  nature  is  altered,  and  a 
train  of  events  produced,  different  from  that  which  would  have  oc- 
curred, if  the  powers  of  nature  had  been  left  to  proceed  in  their  or- 
dinary course.     For,  the  laws  of  nature  are  not  so  constituted  as  to 
produce  the  same  results  under  all  circumstances.  On  the  contrary, 
they  are  suspended  on  conditions ;  and  according  as  one  or  the  other 
of  these  conditions  occurs,  different  effects  are  produced  ;  yet  all 
equally  agreeable  to  the  laws  of  nature.     Thus,  for  example,  with- 
out the  least  violation  of  the  laws  of  nature,  this  or  another  very 
different  event  may  take  place,  according  as  this  or  another  free 

31 


^2  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

agent  exerts  his  influence  upon  nature,  or  exerts  this  or  another 
kind  of  influence,  or  no  influence  at  all. (4) 

Illustration  1. 

The  Scriptures  represent  that  as  certain,  which  we  have  above 
proved  to  be  not  impossible.  They  refer  the  future  resurrection  of 
the  dead  and  future  retribution,  to  the  immediate  divine  agency  (of 
God  or  Christ.)  Phil.  3:  21,  xuzd  ir^v  ivigyetav  tov  dvvaa&at  avrov 
xtti  vnoTa^ai  tavzM  id  ndvza  according  to  the  working,  by  which  he 
is  able  also  to  subdue  all  things  unto  himself.  Matt.  22:  29,  dvvafnv 
^iov  the  power  of  God,  16:  27,  fieXkit  iQXfaOaitv  itj  do^rj  lov  naz- 
Qog  ctvTov  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father.  John  5:  20 — 29. 
Acts  6:  28. 

III.  2.  It  is  very  possible,  that  God  would  have  been  obliged 
to  bind  the  various  operations  of  natural  causes  to  such  laws  as 
would  have  infringed  the  freedom  of  rational  beings,  and  thus  have 
counteracted  his  own  purpose ;  or  if  he  did  choose  to  do  this,  it  is 
possible  that  the  course  of  nature  would  have  militated  against  his 
other  purposes,  unless  prevented  by  his  immediate  agency.^  But 
the  inscrutable  God  may  also  have  had  other  reasons  why  he  chose 
not  to  exclude  himself  entirely  from  all  immediate  connexion  with 
his  world  ;  and  perhaps  would  not  create  a  world  which  should  be 
governed  by  an  everlasting  mechanism. 

III.  3.     Compare  Koppen's  work,  Pt.  I.  p.  46  (2d  ed.  p.  56.) 

III.  4.  Just  as  free  creatures,  without  the  least  violation  of  the 
laws  of  nature,  very  frequently  change  the  natural  train  of  events ; 
so  also  can  God,  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  laws  of  nature, 
either  himself  exert  an  influence  on  the  created  world,  or  he  may 
commission  other  spirits,  such  as  angels^  to  exert  their  agency  ;  and 
thus  cause  effects  to  be  produced  which  would  never  have  been 
produced  without  this  immediate  or  mediate  interference  of  God, 
and  effects  which  shall  draw  after  them  other  effects,  and  greatly 

1  "  No  one  (says  Kant)  can  be  so  inflated  with  a  sense  of  his  own  discern- 
ment, as  to  undertake  to  decide,  whether  that  wonderful  preservation  of  the 
various  species  in  the  vegetable  and  animal  kingdoms,  in  which  every  new  plant 
or  animal  generated,  possesses  the  entire  perfection  of  structure  of  its  original ; 
and  (in  the  vegetable  kingdom)  all  the  delicate  beauties  of  colour ;  so  that  each 
species  of  plants,  at  the  return  of  every  spring,  is  reinstated  in  all  its  unabated 
excellence,  its  seeds  being  protected  from  the  destructive  influence  of  disorgan- 
izing nature,  during  the  unfavourable  weather  of  fall  and  winter  ; — no  one,  I  say, 
can  determine,  whether  this  is  produced  by  the  mere  influence  of  natural  causes, 
or  whether  it  does  not  rather  in  every  instance  require  the  immediate  influence 
of  the  Creator."  Religionslehre,S.  115. 

2  Acts  12:  7—11.  5:  19,20. 


^  36.]  IMMEDIATE  INTERPOSITION.  943 

change  the  course  of  things  in  the  world.  For  if  we  were  to  sup- 
pose it  to  be  a  law  of  nature,  that  God  can  never  exert  an  imme- 
diate influence  on  the  world,  and  that  creatures  are  the  only  agents 
in  this  world  ;  we  should  without  any  reason,  take  precisely  that  for 
granted,  which  is  yet  to  be  determined  in  this  investigation. 


SECTION    XXXVI. 


The  reality  of  the  immediate  operation  of  God  on  the  course  of 
nature,  is  proved  by  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  Scriptures. 

That  we  not  only  have  no  reason  to  regard  the  immediate  agency 
of  God  on  the  created  world  as  improbable,  but  have  proof  of  the 
reality  of  such  agency,  is  evident(l)  from  that  train  of  extraordinary 
events  termed  miracles.  For,  these  miracles,  if  we  regard  them  not 
separately,  but  in  connexion  with  other  events  (<§>  8.  Illust.  4,)  were 
evidently  performed  for  a  specific  purpose,  viz.  to  establish  the  au- 
thority of  Jesus  ;  and  to  this  purpose,  notwithstanding  the  variety 
of  their  nature,  they  all  harmoniously  tend.  They  must  therefore 
be  ascribed  to  some  rational  cause  ;  and  as  they  evidently  transcend 
the  power  of  man,  their  Author  must  be  superhuman.  These  mira- 
cles the  Scriptures  expressly (2)  ascribe  to  God. (3) 

Illustration  1. 
The  reality  of  immediate  divine  agency, 

Luke  1:  35 — 37,  dvvafitg  vxpiaiov — ovx  advvarov  naga  tm  d^SM 
nav  grjfjia  the  power  of  the  Highest — nothing  is  impossible  with  God. 
Eph.  1:  19,  20,  ivigyeiazov  xQaiovg  Ttjgiaxvog  avtov,^v  ivTqgyriGSv 
iv  rep  XgtGTm  tytiQug  amov  in  veitQMv  the  energy  of  his  mighty  pow- 
er, which  he  exerted  on  Christ  when  he  raised  him  from  the  dead. 
Acts  10:  38,  I'xQiatv  amov  6  '&e6g  nv^vfAati  xal  dvpccfiec  God  anoint- 
ed him  with  the  Spirit  and  with  power.  John  11:  41  etc.  Jesus 
represented  the  miracle  of  the  resuscitation  of  Lazarus  as  the  effect 
of  God's  hearing  his  prayer,  and  of  course  as  the  act  of  God.  John 
5:ll,6nctTr}gfiOvfgyaCstcc0jX(xyMigy<xCofiai,  "as  my  Father  per- 
formed miracles  on  the  Sabbath  day,  so  do  I  also."  John  11:25 


244  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

etc.  Acts  4:  9  etc.  (comp.  <§>  44.  Illust.  6.  §  82.  IHust.  10.)  1  Cor, 
12:  7 — 11,  navta  xavza  ivspyn  to  ev  xctl  to  avzo  TivivfiusW  these 
things  are  wrought  by  that  one  and  the  same  Spirit.  Compare  <^  8, 10. 
Those  who  ascribe  these  miracles  to  recondite  natural  causes,  and 
allege  that  these  causes  were  provided  (performed)  at  the  time  of 
the  creation  ;  assume  gratuitously  the  existence  of  causes,  which 
can  neither  be  proved  from  experience,  nor  rendered  probable  by 
any  other  reasoning  (a  priori,  «^  35.)  On  the  contrary,  a  preforma- 
tion of  natural  causes  from  those  miracles,  is  rendered  improbable 
by  the  great  diversity  of  their  nature,  being  not  confined  either  to 
particular  persons  and  places,  or  to  particular  and  specific  modes  of 
operation.  Had  they  been  performed  only  on  particular  persons 
and  at  particular  places,  we  might  possibly  suppose,  that  the  efficient 
cause  of  the  phenomena,  foreseen  and  foretold  by  a  worker  of  mira- 
cles, lay  in  the  original  constitution  of  nature  ;  or  if  these  extraor- 
dinary effects  had  been  of  one  or  only  a  few  specific  kinds,  we 
might  possibly  regard  natural  causes  as  adequate  to  their  production. 
But  as  they  were  of  so  many  various  kinds,  and  were  performed 
without  the  least  restriction  of  any  sort,  even  on  the  most  unexpected 
and  accidental  occasions,  neither  of  the  above  suppositions  is  ad- 
missible. Compare  ^  8.  Illust.  3,  4.  "^  21.  Illust.  5. 

III.  2.     Miracles  were  ascribed  to  the  agency  of  God. 

This  was  done  by  the  explicit  declarations  of  the  persons  by 
whom  the  miracles  were  performed.  On  some  occasions  also  God 
himself,  the  proper  Author  of  these  miracles,  (or  at  least,  a  superior 
being  who  acted  by  the  command  of  God,  <§>  35.  Illust.  4,)  manifest- 
ed his  presence,  without  the  intervention  of  any  human  voice,  John 
1:  32  etc.  5:37.  Matt.  3:  16  etc.  17:  5.  Acts  9:  3—7.  26:  13—16. 
Luke  1:  11  etc.  26  etc.  Acts  12:  7.  But  the  inward  feeling 
which  convinced  the  divine  messengers  of  the  reality  of  an  extraor- 
dinary influence  of  God  on  their  souls,  was  confirmed  and  proved 
by  such  outward  acts,  as  could  not  have  been  the  mere  figment  of 
imagination,  nor  the  effect  of  mere  human  volition.  So  also,  in 
those  cases  in  which  the  evidence  of  the  presence  of  God  or  of  an 
angel  was  perceived  through  the  medium  of  the  senses,  the  reality 
of  that  presence  was  confirmed  by  the  connexion  of  those  appear- 
ances with  other  incidents,  which  were  either  interwoven  with  the 
public  life  of  the  person  concerned  (John  1 :  51  ;)^  or  were  connect- 


1  "The  open  heaven  and  the  ascending  and  descending,"  i.  e.  the  Ministry 
"  of  angels,"  denoted  the  visible  evidence  of  the  greatness  of  Jesus,  or  that  series 
of  miracles  the  performance  of  which  he  shortly  after  commenced.  In  this  pas- 
sage, Jesus  had  before  his  eye  the  miracle  of  the  opening  of  the  heavens  (Matt. 
3:  16,)  and  the  ministry  of  angels  (4:  11,)  both  of  which  had  already  taken  place. 
See  Dissert.  I,  in  librorum  N.  T.  histor.  aliquot  loca,  p.  81  etc. 


^  36.]  IMMEDIATE  INTERPOSITION.  245 

ed  immediately  with  those  appearances  themselves,  (as,  for  example, 
Acts  9:  8—18.  Luke  1:  13,  24,  36,  39  etc.  2:  12,  18.  Acts  12: 
7  etc.;)  or  at  least,  were  always  of  such  a  nature  that  they  could 
not  have  been  the  effect  of  mere  imagination,  or  the  result  of  hu- 
man knowledge  or  power.  In  like  manner,  we  must  ascribe  to  God 
those  extraordinary  phenomena  which  a  divine  messenger  had  not 
been  particularly  expected  or  requested  to  perform,  but  which,  from 
their  nature,  relate  to  a  person  or  transaction,  in  regard  to  which  we 
have  reason,  from  a  prior  declaration  substantiated  by  miracles,  to 
expect  a  special  agency  and  an  extraordinary  assistance  of  God. — 
Examples  of  such  extraordinary  incidents,  which  had  not  been  pre- 
dicted by  any  divine  messenger,  are  found  in  Matt.  27:  50 — 53.  1 
Sam.  5:  6.  2  Sam.  6:  7.  The  miracles  mentioned  in  the  first  pas- 
sage, and  which  occurred  immediately  after  the  death  of  Jesus, 
although  they  had  not  been  foretold,  are  with  propriety  regarded, 
not  as  accidental  occurrences,  but  as  effects  produced  by  divine 
power,  for  the  purpose  of  authenticating  the  divinity  of  Christ's 
mission  and  doctrines  ;  because  this  mission  and  these  doctrines  had 
been  before  authenticated  by  so  many  other  miracles  to  which  Jesus 
himself  had  appealed.  John  10:  36,  37.  So  also  the  calamitous  oc- 
currences recorded  1  Sam.  6:  7,  and  2  Sam.  6:  7,  may  justly  be 
regarded  as  intentional  acts  of  God  ;  because  they  followed  the 
transgression  of  a  law  of  Moses  (Num.  4:  17 — 20,)  the  divinity  of 
whose  mission  and  legislation  had  been  proved  by  many  miracles, 
Deut.  34:  10  etc. 

III.  3.  The  view  of  miracles,  given  in  this  section,  is  not  appli- 
cable to  all  supernatural  phenomena  ;  but  only  to  those  which  are 
to  be  regarded  as  indications  and  proofs  of  the  reality  of  that  inter- 
nal divine  influence  which  particular  persons,  such  as  Jesus  and  his 
apostles,  profess  to  have  experienced.  It  cannot  be  denied  that 
God  can,  in  a  supernatural  manner,  not  only  awaken  certain  ideas 
in  the  minds  of  individuals,  but  also  produce  at  the  same  time  a  firm 
conviction  of  the  supernatural  and  divine  origin  of  these  ideas  (<5>  7. 
Illust.  1).  But  of  the  reality  of  such  operations  on  the  minds  of 
individuals,  others  cannot  be  convinced,  unless  a  persuasion  of  their 
reality  is  produced  in  their  own  minds  by  a  similar  supernatural  di- 
vine influence,  or  unless  the  pretensions  of  the  individuals  to  super- 
natural influence,  is  substantiated  by  outward  facts  which  are  learn- 
ed in  the  ordinary  way,  i.  e.  by  experience  or  history,  and  which 
can  be  viewed  as  conclusive  evidence  of  the  truth  of  those  profes- 
sions. Now,  if  persons  whose  character  gives  them  the  strongest 
claims  to  credibility  (*§>  7),  profess  that  the  same  divine  Being  to 
whom  they  attributed  their  doctrines  (<§>  6,  9),  excited  in  them  also 
the  expectation  of  such   miraculous  phenomena  in  the  material 


246  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

world  (<§>  8.  lllust.  8.  <5>  10.  Illust.  26),  phenomena  the  production 
of  which  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all  past  ages  pronounces  to 
have  surpassed  the  ability  of  the  ablest  and  most  distinguished  men, 
and  which  the  experience  of  our  own  age  proves  to  be  beyond  the 
power  of  any  person  living  ;  and  if  the  confident  expectations  of 
these  men,  which  led  them  to  announce  and  predict  these  extraor- 
dinary phenomena  (^  8),  (however  strange  it  may  appear),  were 
actually  followed  (^  5),  and  beyond  all  suspicion  of  deception  ("^ 
8.  Illust.  4),  by  the  occurrence  of  those  very  phenomena,  and  this 
not  only  in  one  or  in  several  instances,  but  in  every  instance  and 
uniformly  and  without  fail  (<§>  8.  Illust.  6)  ;  would  it  not  betray  an  un- 
reasonable obstinacy,  if,  in  defiance  of  all  these  facts,  we  should  still 
doubt  the  correctness  of  these  men's  conviction  of  the  divine  origin 
of  their  doctrines,  and  especially  since  we  are  compelled  to  admit 
the  possibility  of  such  a  conviction  ?  To  others,  to  whom  this  in- 
ward conviction  could  not  be  communicated,  the  truth  and  certainty 
of  that  personal  consciousness  from  which  Jesus  and  his  apostles 
derived  their  conviction  of  the  divine  origin  of  their  doctrines,  are 
adequately  proved  by  those  miracles  which  most  visibly  and  invari- 
ably followed  the  declaration  of  these  persons  that  they  had  an  in- 
ternal intimation  and  an  expectation  of  them  {itlaTig^  38).  When- 
ever the  Spirit  of  God,  acting  through  his  messengers,  produced  vis- 
ible effects  (Acts  10:  38.  Matt.  10:  28.  Compare  ^  82),  which, 
according  to  the  experience  of  all  ages,  no  other  persons  could  pro- 
duce ;  that  Spirit,  though  himself  invisible,  gave  a  demonstration 
that  he  really  exerted  an  influence  upon  those  his  messengers  who 
ascribed  their  doctrines  to  him  (John  3:  34.  Luke  4:  14),  and 
proved  that  those  doctrines,  as  well  as  their  visible  miraculous  works, 
originated  from  himself,  and  were  therefore  true,  because  he,  the 
Instructor  of  mankind  by  his  divine  messengers,  is  true.^  JNor  should 
our  inability  to  discriminate  between  absolute  and  relative  miracles, 
involve  us  in  doubt  respecting  the  object  of  them.^  Whether  these 
miracles  were  of  an  absolute  or  relative  kind,  is  a  matter  of  no  im- 

1  1  John  5:  6.  In  the  work  on  the  Object  of  John,  p.  227,  the  words  xal  to* 
TtVbvfut — ah'jd'tLa  are  explained  thus  :  "  The  Spirit,  or  gift  of  working  miracles 
which  was  promised  by  Jesus  for  the  confirmation  of  faith  in  him  (John  6:  38. 
14:  12),  and  which  still  continues  since  his  exaltation,  proves  the  fact  that  the 
Spirit  is  true,  {dXtj&tia  i.  q.  dkrjd'ij?^  that  Spirit  which  since  the  exaltation  of  Je- 
sus, promulgates  the  doctrine  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God."  The  miracles  of 
the  Spirit  testify  to  the  truth  of  his  doctrines.  By  nvsvfia,  in  the  first  clause, 
some  interpreters  (such  as  Grotius  and  Gabler)  understand  the  miracles  of 
Christ ;  others,  the  religious  views  and  feelings  of  Christians,  which  are  the  ef- 
fects of  christian  doctrines  ;  Knapp  includes  in  the  testimony  of  the  Spirit,  all 
the  evidences  for  the  divinity  of  the  person  and  doctrines  of  Jesus,  in  general  : 
his  miracles,  his  resurrection,  and  the  internal  excellence  of  his  doctrines.  See 
Lofler's  Comment.  Theolog.  Paulus'  Introd.  to  New  Test.  p.  44. 

2  Schmidt,  sup.  cit.  p.  108. 


^  36.]  IMMEDIATE  INTERPOSITION.  247 

portance  here  ;  for  in  either  case,  it  is  certain  tliat  their  avowed 
(and  not  merely  afterwards  conjectured)  object,^  as  stated  by  the 
persons  themselves  who  wrought  the  miracles,  was,  to  evince  the 
truth  of  their  conviction  and  profession  of  the  inward  influence  of 
God  upon  their  souls.  Jesus  and  his  apostles  most  certainly  could 
not  have  accomplished  this  object,  by  the  performance  of  numerous 
and  various  miracles,  which  always  followed  when  they  expected 
them,  and  which  could  not  have  been  the  result  of  chance  f  unless 
either  natural  talents  superior  to  those  of  all  other  men  had  been 
given  them,  or  a  superior  (a  superhuman)  being  produced  these  mi- 
racles through  their  instrumentality.  Now,  if  it  was  the  Lord  of 
nature  himself,  (and  the  great  variety  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  and 
his  apostles,  most  naturally  leads  us  to  the  omnipotence  of  the  God 
of  nature  as  their  cause),  who  in  fact  produced  these  phenomena, 
so  that  they  were  absolute  miracles,  wrought  immediately  by  God 
himself;  then  God,  by  his  immediate  agency,  did  promote  the  pur- 
poses of  those  who  instrumentally  wrought  the  miracles  ;  and  the 
miracles  actually  evince,  what  they  profess,  that  he  exerted  an  in- 
ward influence  on  their  souls,  to  prove  which,  was,  according  to 
their  declaration,  the  real  object  of  those  miracles.  But  if  we  re- 
gard these  miracles  as  relative,  then  they  must  either  have  been 
performed  by  a  spirit  of  a  higher  rank,  acting  by  divine  command,^ 
or  by  the  extraordinary  natural  talents  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles.  If 
the  former  was  the  case,  then  God  did  actually  confirm  what  Jesus 
and  his  apostles  wished  to  prove  by  those  miracles,  namely,  that 
their  souls  were  under  the  influence  and  agency  of  God.  For  it  is 
one  and  the  same  thing,  whether  this  declaration  be  confirmed  im- 
mediately by  God,  or  mediately  by  a  superior  spirit  acting  under 
him.  Thus,  for  example,  the  declaration  of  God  that  Jesus  is  the 
Messiah,  is  just  as  vaHd  when  made  through  the  instrumentality  of 
angels  (Luke  2:  9 — 14.  1:  30 — 33),  as  when  given  immediately 
by  himself  (Matt.  3:  17.  17:  5.  Comp.  John  5:37.  2  Pet.  1:  17). 
— If  the  latter  be  the  case,  if  the  miracles  were  wrought  by  the  ex- 
traordinary natural  powers  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  which  is  in  the 
highest  degree  improbable  (Illust.  1)  ;  even  on  this  very  improba- 
ble supposition,  the  affirmation  is  not  invahdated,  that  the  object  of 
the  Author  of  nature  in  originally  bestowing  on  them  the  extraor- 
dinary talents  by  which  they  wrought  these  miracles,  was  the  same 
as  that  which  they  themselves  wished  to  accomplish  by  them.'* 
For,  as  the  character  of  the  miracles  which  Jesus  wrought,  corres- 
ponded so  perfectly  with  the  doctrines  which  he  wished  to  confirm  by 
them  ;  we  should  be  obliged  to  admit,  that  the  Author  of  nature  in- 


I 


1  §  8.  Illust.  1 , 2,  6.  §  10, 19.  2  §  8.  Illust.  6. 

3  §  8.  Illust.  7.  4  §  8.  Illust.  1,2,6. 


248  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 


tended  to  substantiate  the  doctrines  of  Jesus ;  and  that  he  had  no 
other  object  in  view,  as  he  gave  Jesus  ability  to  perform  precisely 
such  miracles,  and  only  such,  as  corresponded  perfectly  with  the  doc- 
trines he  taught.  Moreover,  as  those  miracles  recorded  in  the  New 
Testament,  which  were  performed  by  other  persons  besides  Jesus, 
such  as  those  wrought  by  his  apostles  and  by  his  seventy  disciples 
(Luke  10:  17),  and  even  by  those  who  were  not  professed  disciples 
of  Jesus^ — as  all  these  miracles  unitedly  tend  to  support  the  author- 
ity of  Jesus,^  or  that  of  his  apostles^  which  depended  on  his  f  it 
necessarily  follows,  that  we  must  believe  that  the  object  of  these 
miracles  was,  to  establish  the  authority  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles, 
even  if  we  adopt  the  supposition,  that  they  were  performed  by  vir- 
tue of  some  natural  powers  to  work  miracles.  And  why  should  it 
be  supposed,  that  the  Author  of  nature,  in  bestowing  on  these  per- 
sons the  power  of  working  miracles,  had  any  other  object  in  view, 
than  that  which  Jesus  had  when  he  wrought  them,  and  which  he 
openly  avowed,  namely,  to  establish  his  doctrines  and  authority  ? 
For  the  miracles  of  all  these  different  persons  harmonized  most  per- 
fectly, for  the  accomplishment  of  this  same  purpose  ;  nay,  their  na- 
ture was  such,  that  they  were  confined  to  this  single  purpose.^ 
Thus,  for  example,  Paul  could  not  use  his  miraculous  powers  in 
vindication  of  his  Pharisaic  principles,  and  in  opposition  to  Chris- 
tianity (Gal.  1:  14,  23)  ;  but  was  then  only  enabled  to  exert  them, 
when  he  wished  to  use  them  in  confirmation  of  the  authority  and 
doctrines  of  Jesus ;  for  while  he  was  yet  persecuting  Jesus  and  his 
followers,  he  wrought  i:o  miracles,  but  assailed  them  only  with  im- 
prisonment and  punishments.  But  although  this  latter  hypothesis, 
improbable  as  it  is,  would  not  militate  against  the  authority  of  Jesus 
and  his  apostles,  still  the  supernatural  interference  of  God  with  the 
ordinary  course  of  nature,  can  be  proved  only  by  those  miracles, 
which  were  either  absolute  in  their  nature,  or  relative  of  the  first 
class,  that  is,  such  as  were  wrought  by  a  spirit  of  a  higher  order 
acting  by  command  of  God. 

1  Mark  9:  38.  Matt.  7:  22. 

2  Mark  6:  7,  he  gave  them  power  over  unclean  spirits.  Acts  3:  16.  4:  7 — 10, 
30.  Luke  10:  17.  Mark  9:  38.  Matt.  7:  22. 

3  Comp.  the  Dissertation  "Von  der  Geistes  Gaben  der  Korinthischen  Chris- 
ten, Neues  Repert.  Th.  III.  S.  346.  See  also  supra,  §  10.  Illust.  27. 

4  John  13:  20.  14:  13,  14.  15:  4, 7.  Acts  3:  12—16.  2  Cor.  4:  5.  §  9, 10. 

5  Mark  9:  39.  1  Cor.  12:  3.  In  the  "  Dissert,  on  the  epistles  to  the  Corinthi- 
ans," this  passage  is  thus  explained  :  no  one  who  speaks  in  a  strange  language 
(iv  itvevfiaxt  d'aov,)  can  detract  from  Jesus ;  and  no  one  that  speaks  in  a  strange 
language,  can  praise  Jesus,  unless  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Opusc. 
Academ.  Vol.  II.  p.  319.  The  miraculous  gift  of  speaking  in  strange  languages, 
could  therefore  be  used  ordy  in  honor  of  Jesus. 


^  37.]  SUPERNATURAL  DIVINE  AGENCY  POSSIBLE.  249 


SECTION   XXXVII. 

The  ^possibility  of  other  supernatural  operations  of  God  in  the 
world,  besides  miracles. 

If  it  be  a  fact,  that  God  exerts  a  supernatural  agency  in  the 
world,  then  it  is  possible,  that  some  phenomena  are  produced  by  his 
agency,  which  cannot  with  propriety  be  denominated  miracles  ;(1) 
either  because  there  is  nothing  strange (2)  about  them,  or  because 
we  have  no  express  declaration  from  God,  to  assure  us  that  such  is 
their  nature.  (3) 

Illustration  1. 

We  sometimes  meet  with  occurrences  of  an  extraordinary  nature 
which  excite  admiration,  and  yet,  as  they  can  be  explained  in  dif- 
ferent ways,  and  as  we  cannot  ascertain  to  a  certainty  the  agent  by 
which  they  are  produced,  they  are  not  valid  proofs  or  indications  of 
a  particular  divine  influence,  like  the  proofs  from  miracles  {orifiila 
John  6:  25,  30.  2  Cor.  12:  12.  Mark  16:  20,  17).  And  when 
any  phenomenon  is  not  intended  to  substantiate  (§  8,  10)  the  dec- 
larations of  some  divine  messenger,  who  professes  to  have  an  invis- 
ible influence  of  God  upon  his  soul  (<§>  6),  but  is  produced  merely 
that  it  may  exist;  it  is  neither  important  (<5>  39)  nor  necessary, that 
we  should  be  able  to  distinguish  the  ordinary  from  the  extraordina- 
ry providence  of  God. 

III.  2.  We  can  easily  imagine  that  in  particular  circumstances  of 
time  and  place,  the  agency  of  some  natural  cause  or  causes,  unknown 
to  us,  may  render  the  occurrence  of  a  certain  event,  which  has  noth- 
ing extraordinary  in  itself,  impossible ;  unless  the  immediate  agency 
of  God  is  exerted.  Moreover,  there  actually  are  some  instances  of 
the  supernatural  agency  of  God  (the  influences  of  grace),  the  super- 
natural origin  of  which  cannot  be  discovered  from  their  own  nature, 
but  must  be  learned  exclusively  from  the  declarations  of  God  him- 
self (<5>  115).  But  as  these  divine  influences  are  distinguished  by 
nothing  extraordinary  to  excite  our  astonishment,^  and  as  they  make 
no  deep  impression  on  our  senses  f  they  do  not  point  us  distinctly 
to  the  superior  cause  whence  they  originate :  and  they  are  accord- 
ingly no  evidence  of  the  extraordinary  agency  of  God  (Illust.  1). 


'  Comp.  "  Dissert,  de  efficientia  Spiritfts  Sancti,  in  mentibus  humanis,"  §  20 
2  §  5.  Illust.  6.  §  8.  Illust.  4,  6. 
32 


250  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

III.  3.  Extraordinary  occurrences,  especially  solitary  ones  {§  8. 
Tllust.  8),  which  we  are  unable  to  explain  by  the  laws  of  nature 
known  to  us,  may  have  been  occasioned  by  the  intervention  of  a 
circumstance  which  escaped  our  notice,  or  may  be  the  natural  effect 
of  some  cause  with  which  we  are  unacquainted. 


SECTION    XXXVIII 


To  believe  the  possibility  of  a  supernatural  agency  of  God  in  the 
world f  is  important  in  reference  to  prayer. 

We  must  admit,  that  God  can  exert  a  supernatural  influence  on 
the  course  of  things  in  the  world,  or  we  cannot  discharge  the  duty  of 
prayer(l)  with  perseverance  and  without  any  discouraging  reflections. 
For,  although  prayer  is  prescribed  for  the  benefit  of  men, (2)  and 
not  for  the  sake  of  God  (Matt.  6:  8)  ;  still  even  the  moral  benefit 
of  prayer(3)  cannot  be  attained  by  us,  unless  we  pray  with  earnest- 
ness and  fervour.  But  this  fervour  in  prayer  will  unavoidably  sub- 
side,(4)  unless  we  are  convinced  that  God  now  regards  our  prayers, 
or  that  he  did  regard  them  in  the  primitive  construction  of  the 
world. (5)  Now,  no  firm  conviction  of  this  kind  will  be  possible,  if 
we  suppose,  what  cannot  be  proved,  either  that  God  cannot  any 
longer  exert  an  influence  on  the  created  world,  or  that  he  very 
rarely  does  so,  and  only  in  case  he  finds  miracles  necessary  (<§>  36, 
37.  Illust.  1).  For,  as  the  natural  course  of  things  in  the  world 
very  much  depends  on  the  free  actions  of  beings  (§  35.  Illust.  4) 
who  are  neither  acquainted  with  our  circumstances  nor  concerned 
about  them  ;  as  it  depends  on  the  agency  of  beings  whose  actions 
God  has  determined  to  leave  free,  and  not  to  confine  by  irresistible 
laws  {§  35.  Illust.  2)  ;  our  prayers  would  constantly  be  disturbed  by^ 
the  apprehension,  that  the  course  of  nature  might  not  coincide  with 
our  wishes  or  subserve  our  interest ;  and  our  hope,  that  God  him- 
self would  aid  us,  would  ever  be  a  doubtful  one ;  inasmuch  as  he 
would  be  bound  by  an  immutable  law  not  to  change  the  natural 
course  of  things,  even  in  those  cases  where  it  mihtated  against  our 
interest  and  our  wishes  (James  1:  6).     If  it  were  the  first  and  su- 


^  38.]  PRAYER.  251 

preme  object  of  God,  even  at  the  time  of  creation,  to  leave  the  cre- 
ated world  to  its  own  course ;  we  should  have  reason  to  fear,  that  this 
fixed  purpose  of  his  would  not  suffer  him  to  regard  our  prayers  and 
provide  for  our  happiness.  But  if  God  can  act  freely,  and  to  any 
extent,  in  and  upon  the  created  world  ;(6)  then  we  may  confident- 
ly hope  that,  in  every  instance,  let  the  natural  course  of  things  be 
what  it  may,  God  will  not  suffer  any  thing  to  befal  us,(7)  but  what 
is,  according  to  his  infallible  judgment,  best  calculated  to  promote 
our  interest,  nothing  but  what  will  correspond  with  the  desires  ut- 
tered to  him  in  our  prayers,  or  at  least  with  the  purport  of  such 
prayers  as  are  well  pleasing  in  his  sight. (8) 

Illustration  1. 

Luke  18:  1—8.  Ps.  50:  15.  Philip.  4:  6.  comp.  Rom.  15: 
30—32. 

III.  2.  Compare  the  Programm  of  Nitzsch,  (at  Wittenberg), 
on  the  Manner  in  which  Jesus  enforced  the  duty  of  prayer,  p.  13,  38. 

III.  3.     The  advantages  of  prayer, 

Michaelis,  in  his  System  of  practical  divinity  (Pt.  I.  p.  222), 
specifies  the  following  benefits  of  prayer :  "  It  imparts  a  sensible 
form  (a  visible  reality)  to  our  abstract  and  theoretical  faith,  and 
thus  renders  it  a  better  shield  against  the  assaults  of  vice,  which 
comes  armed  with  the  powers  of  sense  : — It  renders  us  familiar  with 
things  invisible  :— It  makes  us  recollect  the  invisible  God,  more  fre- 
quently, amid  our  ordinary  avocations  : — It  makes  us  afraid  of  trans- 
gressing the  divine  laws,  and  causes  shame  before  God  for  our  past 
sins  : — And,  lastly,  it  awakens  a  lively  feeling  of  gratitude  to  God." 
JVitzsch,  in  his  programm  (p.  8),  remarks  thus  :  "The  desire  of  di- 
vine aid,  which  is  brought  into  action  in  prayer,  awakens  in  us  a 
more  vivid  idea  of  God  and  of  his  attributes,  and  especially  it  ex- 
cites a  feeling  of  our  dependance  on  him,  as  our  Lord  and  Judge, 
and  as  the  Author  of  our  happiness ;  and  thus  in  many  respects 
contributes  to  improve  our  hearts  and  spread  tranquillity  through  our 
souls." 

III.  4.     The  ground  of  earnestness  in  prayer, 

Nitzsch,  in  the  above  cited  programm  (p.  37  etc.),  remarks: 
*'  If,  agreeably  to  the  purpose  of  God,  prayer  is  nothing  more  than 
a  religious  exercise  for  the  promotion  of  practical  piety  ;  still,  as  he 


252  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

commands  us  to  pray  to  him,  he  must  wish  us  to  believe  that  he 
regards  our  prayers.  For,  the  fervour  of  our  prayer  would  neces- 
sarily and  instantly  subside,  if  whilst  we  were  engaged  in  earnest 
supplication,  the  thought  should  arise,  "  God  does  indeed  command 
me  to  pray,  but  this  prayer  will  not  secure  to  me  a  single  blessing 
which  he  would  not  have  given  me  without  it." 

III.  5.  Luke  11:  8,  9,  ainTtf,  xul  doOriGitai  vf-ilv  ask  and  it 
shall  be  given  to  you.  1  Pet.  3:  12,  ra  cJra  xvgiov  ftg  dt7]aiv  di- 
naloiv  the  ears  of  the  Lord  are  attentive  to  the  prayer  of  the  right- 
eous. Compare  Psalm  24:  16,  18.  145:  18  etc.  niin";  31^;? 
VN")p-b5b  Jehovah  is  near  to  all  who  call  upon  him. 

III.  6.  Mark  14:  36,  «/?/?«  o  nax^g,  ndvzcc  dward  coi  Abba 
Father,  all  things  are  possible  to  thee.  Ps.  86:  6 — 10. 

III.  7.  Rom.  8:  28  etc.  rcilg  ayanwat  tov  '&f6v,  ndvva  ovvtQyii 
eig  z6  aya&ov  to  those  who  love  God,  all  things  work  together  for 
good.  V.  31  etc.  1  Pet.  5:  7.  Heb.  13:  5,  6. 

III.  8.     TTie  proper  nature  of  prayer. 

The  nature  of  that  confidence  in  God  which  we  are  to  manifest 
in  our  prayers,  requires  that  we  should  regard  God's  views  and  de- 
signs as  the  wisest  and  best,  and  that  our  prayers  for  all  those  things 
which  it  is  lawful  for  us  to  ask  of  God,  such  as  the  supply  of  our 
bodily  necessities,^  but  which  have  no  necessary  influence  on  our 
moral  improvement,^  should  never  be  absolute  and  unconditional ; 
but  we  should  pray  that  God  would  bestow  them,  if  in  his  wisdom 
he  sees  them  to  be  good  for  us  f  for  often  the  things  which  we  de- 
sire as  blessings,  would,  if  bestowed,  prove  a  curse.*  "  Germanus^ 
Christi  discipulus  in  eo  genere  precationis,  quo  certa  hujus  vitae  com- 
moda  expetit,  mala  deprecatur,  ipsi  Deo,  quod  sibi  conveniat  decer- 
nendum  relinquet ;  ea  vero  bona,  quorum  nobis  spem  certam  fecit 
Christus,  (e.  g.  nvevf^a  ayiov  Luke  11:  13),  ita  Deum  rogabit  ut 
nihil  intermittat  eorum,  quae  ab  ipso  fieri  oporteat  ad  impetrandum 
auxilium  divinum."^     Very  different  was  the  case  with  those  who 


1  Matt.  6:  11.  24:  20.  Phil.  4:  6.  1  Pet.  5:  7.  2  Luke  11:  13. 

3  Matt.  26:  39.  Gen.  1:  10.  15:  32. 

4  2  Cor.  12:  8.  compare  Michaelis'  Dogmat.  p.  668. 

5  Nitzsch,  Programm,  p.  48. 

<j  [i.  e.  A  genuine  disciple  of  Christ,  when  supplicating  for  particular  tempo- 
ral blessings,  or  praying  to  be  shielded  from  temporal  evils,  will  leave  it  to  God 
to  decide  what  things  are  best  for  him  ;  but  when  praying  for  such  blessings  as 
Christ  has  assured  us  will  be  granted,  (e.  g.  the  Holy  Spirit,  Luke  11:  13),  he 
will  60  pray  as  not  to  neglect  any  moans  necessary  for  obtaining  the  diyiqe  as- 
sistance.   S.] 


^  38.]  NATURE  OF  PBAYER.  253 

wrought  miracles,  and  whose  prayers  were  followed  by  the  extraor- 
dinary events  which  they  expected.^  For  in  them  God  himself  ex- 
cited the  assurance  (71/arti/),^  that  precisely  those  miracles  for  which 
they  prayed,  were  agreeable  to  his  will.  Iliatig  in  this  passage, 
signifies  an  antecedent  conviction  that  an  extraordinary  occurrence, 
which  was  yet  invisible  and  only  anticipated,  would  actually  take 
place,  when  desired  or  prayed  for  by  the  worker  of  miracles.  Ilia- 
tig  expresses  the  generic  idea,  including  xaQlofiaxa  Icc^aTmv  gifts  of 
healing,  and  ivegyrjfAuia  dvvdcfifcov  the  exercise  of  miraculous  pow- 
ers v.  9,  10.^  But  this  special  assurance  {niazig),  which  those  who 
wrought  miracles  must  have  possessed,  if  the  extraordinary  effects 
produced  by  them  are  to  be  regarded  as  real  miracles  {§  36.  Illust. 
3),  is  not  given  to  us.  Nor  is  it  necessary  it  should  be  ;  for,  the 
general  belief  of  a  divine  providence  which  takes  charge  of  all  our 
interests  and  necessities,  is  amply  sufficient  for  us.^ 

Note  on  this  paragraph. 

In  the  annunciation  of  his  "  Elementary  Course  etc,"  given  by 
the  author,  in  the  Tiibing.  gel.  Anz.  (sup.  cit.,)  is  the  following 
further  exposition  of  his  views :  "  the  author  does  not  believe,  that 
bis  view  of  the  doctrine  of  divine  providence  tends  to  encourage  the 
expectations  of  those  who  regard  the  faith  of  miracles  as  continuing 
through  every  age  of  the  church,  and  as  being  attainable  at  any 
time  by  real  Christians. — If  we  are  convinced,  that  God  is  not  con- 
fined to  the  ordinary  course  of  nature  (^J*  35,  36.  Illust.  1,)  that 
whenever  it  is  necessary  to  the  attainment  of  his  purpose,  he  can 
exert  his  personal  agency  for  its  accomplishment  (<§>  37,)  and  is 
never  obliged  to  sacrifice  our  best  interests  to  the  immutability  of 
nature's  laws  (*§>  38  ;)  then  we  can  with  the  greater  propriety  re- 
gard every  event  which  God  suffers  to  occur  in  the  natural  course 
of  things,  as  accordant  with  his  benevolent  intentions  (<§.  39). 
Hence,  as  we  admit  that  God  can  interfere  with  the  course  of  na- 
ture, we  shall  be  the  more  contented  with  the  course  of  nature  as  it 

1  John  11:  42.  14:  12—14  (comp.  Dissert.  II,  in  libros  N.  T.  historicos,  p.  54. 
Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  III.  p.  153).  Acts  8:  15—17.  28:  8.  9:  40  (compare  James  5: 
15  etc.) 

2  Mark  11:  22—24.  1  Cor.  12:  9. 

3  "  On  others,  the  same  Spirit  bestows  faith  ;  some  are  taught  by  the  same 
Spirit  to  perform  miraculous  cures,  and  others,  to  perform  other  miracles."  To 
the  other  spiritual  gifts  mentioned  in  this  chapter,  Aoyoff  oo<piagj  yvwasojg,'JtQOcpy- 
rda,  yivrj  yhfjooawj  this  Tciarig  was  not  required  ;  for  the  individual  was  already 
conscious  of  the  possession  of  these  gifts,  at  the  time  of  using  them.  This  ex- 
planation oTniazig,  is  found  in  the  Neuem  Repert.  Vol.  III.  p.  322.  See  in  this 
connexion,  Matt.  17:  20.  21:  21. 

-t  See  Tttbing.  gel.  Anzeig.  for  1793,  p.  372  etc. 


554  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 


is,  and  feel  less  need  of  the  extraordinary  interposition  of  God.  For, 
the  composure  of  our  minds  does  not  require  an  actual  change  in  the 
course  of  things  in  every  particular  instance,  but  only  the  possibility 
of  such  change  {§  37,)  and  an  expectation  that  such  change  will 
be  made,  whenever  a  case  shall  occur  in  which  our  interest  shall,  in 
the  judgment  of  God,  render  such  change  necessary.  But,  to  under- 
take to  determine  the  particular  cases  in  which  such  interference  is 
necessary,  would  be  laying  claim  to  the  possession  of  the  faith  of 
miracles.  Whoever  confides  in  the  omnipotent  and  omniscient  God 
of  love,  as  one  that  has  all  things  under  his  control,  will  act,  in  every 
instance,  agreeably  to  his  best  judgment  and  abilities  (§  40  ;)  for  he 
knows  that  such  a  dutiful  course  of  conduct  is  agreeable  to  the  di- 
vine will ;  and  he  is  assured,  that  if  the  interference  of  God  with 
the  course  of  nature  should  at  any  time  be  necessary,  God  does  not 
stand  in  need  of  our  wisdom  to  point  it  out  to  him,  or  of  our  co- 
operation to  enable  him  to  effect  it.'* 


SECTION   XXXIX. 


Every  thing  takes  place  according  to  the  will  and  the  purposes  of 
God : — an  inference  from  the  preceding  paragraphs. 

If  God  can  at  any  instant  interfere  with  the  course  of  nature  (<§> 
37,  38,)  it  necessarily  follows,  that  all  things  take  place  in  accor- 
dance with  his  pleasure.  For,  as  nothing  can  occur  without  his 
knowledge(l)  and  foresight  of  it  (<§>  22)  (2,)  and  as  God  is  not 
bound  to  leave  all  events  to  their  natural  course ;  it  is  evident,  that 
whatever  he  leaves  to  the  course  of  nature,  not  choosing  to  interfere 
in  the  case,  takes  place,  not  merely  because  such  is  the  course  of 
nature,  but  because  the  Regent  of  the  course  of  nature  found  this 
event  to  be  in  accordance  with  his  wise  and  benevolent  purposes  ; 
(3)  for,  otherwise  he  would  have  interfered,  in  a  supernatural  man- 
ner, with  the  operation  of  natural  causes.  (4)  With  the  utmost  pro- 
priety, then,  we  acknowledge  a  design  and  a  providence(5)  of  God, 
in  every  event  which  transpires  in  the  world,  even  when  we  can 
discover  no  traces  of  a  particular  divine  agency. (6) 

Illustration  1. 

See  Ps.  139:  16.  Acts  11:  28.  20:  23.  21:  11,  and  other  passa- 
ges. 


§  39.]  MORAL  AND  PHYSICAL  EVIL.  255 

III.  2.     The  omniscience  of  God, 

Matt.  10:  29,  tv  gtqov^iov  ov  TitaelTab  inl  ti^v  yrjv,  aviv  tov 
naigog  vfiMv  not  a  sparrow  falleth  to  the  ground  without  your 
Father  (see  also  Luke  12:  16.  Ps.  139:  1 — 15.)  "^viv  tov  naxgog 
vfiojv  is  rendered  by  Kypke,  "  inscio  et  invito  Patre  vestro"  with- 
out the  knowledge  and  consent  of  your  Father.  This  signification 
o(  avev,  he  proves  by  several  passages  from  profane  writers.  Jose- 
phus^  uses  in  the  same  sense,  the  expression  dlxa  {t^ov  absque  Deo, 
without  God  ;  and  in  the  same  passage,  he  uses  the  phrase  ^//a  tmv 
imtgonoDv,  which  he  himself  explains  thus,  "  jW»J  tmp  ImfxiXmwv 
ngoGTu^dvTODv  without  a  direction  {or  command)  from  the  inspec- 
tors." 

III.  3.  Thus,  for  example,  the  elder  James  was  killed  by  Her- 
od (Acts  12:  2 ;)  but  not  contrary  to  the  will  of  God  [ccvev  d^sov.] 
For,  if  the  execution  of  this  apostle  had  not  accorded  with  the 
designs  of  God,  he  could  as  easily  have  prevented  it,  as  prevent  the 
execution  of  Peter,  which  he  did  at  the  same  time  and  under  similar 
circumstances  (v.  6  etc.) 

III.  4.    The  object  of  God  in  the  permission  of  physical  and  moral 
evil)  is  benevolent  and  wise. 

God  has  wise  and  benevolent  objects  in  view,  not  only  in  the 
difficulties  and  afflictions  which  befal  us  in  this  life,  that  is,  in  the 
physical  evil  {«§>  23  ;)  but  also  in  the  permission  of  moral  evil.  For, 
as  rational  and  free  moral  agents  are  the  most  noble  and  the  princi- 
pal creatures  in  the  universe,  and  as  freedom  in  rational  creatures 
who  are  not  absolutely  perfect,^  necessarily  implies  ability  to  sin ; 
both  the  perfection  of  the  best  possible  world  and  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  God  require,  that  beings  should  exist  who  are  capable 
of  sinning.  The  objection,  "  that  if  we  suppose  God  permitted  evil, 
we  shall  make  him  a  co-worker  with  evil  doers,  since  permitting  it  in 
an  absolutely  dependent  being,  is  little  better  than  being  a  co-worker 
with  him,"  is  thus  answered  by  Siiskind  :  ^  "  This  objection  posses- 
ses no  force,  unless  it  can  be  proved  that  God  could  have  prevent- 
ed the  evil  in  dependent  creatures,  without  detriment  to  the  highest 
good  ;  or  that  God  permitted  the  evil  for  the  same  reason  as  the 
good,  namely,  because  it  was  pleasing  to  him,  i.  e.  that  he  permitted 
evil  to  exist,  for  its  own  sake.  But  neither  of  these  suppositions  is 
admitted  in  the  usual  view  of  this  subject ;  for,  ability  to  sin  is  con- 

«  De  bell.  Jud.  Lib.  II.  c.  8.  §  6.  2  Job  15:  15.  4:  18. 

3  Mag.  for  christliche  Dog.  und  Moral,  St.  17.  S.  161  etc. 


256  CREATION  AND  PROVIDENCE.  [bK.  II. 

sidered  in  the  common  system,  as  an  indispensable  condition  of  the 
existence  of  morality  and  freedom." — Actual  transgression  God 
prevents  only  by  moral  means  ;  by  various  motives  he  endeavours  to 
bring  his  free  creatures  to  abhor  the  evil  and  love  that  which  is  good. 
See  Gen.  2:  16.  3:  3.  Rom.  2:  14.  1:  32.  Luke  16:  29  etc.  Matt. 
11:  20.  John  15:  22 — 24.  In  these  passages,  the  physical  evil 
which  is  connected  with  moral  evil,  and  the  menaces  of  conscience, 
and  the  revelation  contained  in  Scripture,  and  miracles,  are  men- 
tioned as  the  means  by  which  God  endeavours  to  excite  a  hatred  of 
evil  and  a  love  of  virtue.  If  men  form  sinful  resolutions,  God  can 
render  their  execution  impossible  ;  and  by  his  special  agency,  if  the 
operation  of  natural  causes  is  insufficient,  frustrate  their  immoral 
purposes.  This  may  be  exemplified  by  the  liberation  of  Peter, 
through  the  instrumentality  of  an  angel  (Acts  12:  6  etc.;)  the  with- 
ering of  Jeroboam's  hand,  when  he  extended  it  against  a  prophet 
(1  K.  13:  4  etc.;)  the  transportation  of  Jesus  to  Egypt  by  a  divine 
command  to  Joseph  (Matt.  2:  13 ;)  by  the  preservation  of  Paul 
from  being  murdered  through  the  intervention  of  the  Roman  cap- 
tain of  the  band  who  heard  the  noise  (Acts  21:  31  ;)  and  on  anoth- 
er occasion,  by  his  being  apprised  of  their  murderous  intention  by 
his  nephew  (Acts  22:  16.)  But  the  wicked  intention  remains  the 
same,  although  prevented  from  going  into  execution  by  an  external 
power.  Beings  possessed  of  moral  agency,  are  generally  not 
rendered  either  better  or  happier  by  the  obstacles  which  prevent 
the  execution  of  their  plans.  And  if  every  sinful  undertaking  were 
hindered,  and  al}  wicked  actions  rendered  impossible,  by  an  external 
force  ;  the  consequence  would  be,  that  rational  agents  would  lose 
their  freedom,  and  with  it  their  dignity  and  happiness.  On  the 
other  hand,  criminal  actions,  which  are  actually  perpetrated,  may  be 
followed  by  effects  very  different  from  what  their  wicked  agents  ex- 
pected, and  may  advance  the  purposes  of  a  wise  God.^  For  these 
reasons,  God  very  frequently  does  not  interpose  and  prevent  moral 
evil.  But  the  object  for  which  God  permits  sin,  is  very  different 
from  the  sinful  guilty  object  of  those  who  commit  it ;  for  the  wick- 
ed are  punished  for  their  crimes,  even  when  they  promote  the  ac- 
complishment of  the  divine  purposes.^  The  object  of  God  is  always 
and  exclusively  good  and  benevolent.  Thus  Joseph  says  (Gen.  50: 
20,)  nihb  rinirn  U^ri'b^^  n^n  "^'^y  trinujri  tn^  ye  devised  evil  against 
me,  but  God  designed  it  for  good.  Acts  3:  14 — 18.  The  following 
remark  is  of  no  small  importance  in  the  explanation  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  ;  and  though  it  has  in  later  times  been  occasion- 

^  1  Is.  10:  7  etc.  1  Cor.  2:  8.    Is.  10:5, 12, 15.  Luke  22:  37,  Set  reX&a&^vat    iv 
ifiol  TO'     "  xai  iiSTd  avofUfiV  ikoyiad-?]"     Acts  4:  27,  28. 

2  Is.  10:  5, 12  etc.  Matt.  21:  38  etc.  22:  6.  1  Thess.  2:  15, 16. 


^  39.]  PRACTICAL  REMARKS.  257 

ally  controverted,  it  has  not  been  overthrown  ;  "  If  a  person  renders 
it  possible  for  another  to  perform  a  certain  action,  or  does  not  pre- 
vent his  performing  it,  that  action  is  called  the  action  of  the  person 
permitting  it.  Thus  in  Ex.  7:  3,  it  is  said  of  God,  that  he  hardened 
Pharaoh's  heart,  because  he  (even  by  the  preservation  of  his  life) 
rendered  it  possible  for  him  to  manifest  such  perverseness.  It  would 
therefore  be  very  unjust  to  accuse  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament, 
who  certainly  had  more  worthy  ideas  of  God,  of  the  gross  error  of 
making  God  the  author  of  wicked  actions — an  error  which  it  is  pre- 
tended, has  been  corrected  only  since  the  Babylonian  captivity,  by 
introducing  among  the  Jews  the  belief  of  a  devil.  Even  Paul  uses 
the  expression  ne'/iipei  avzolg  6  d6og  Ivigyiiav  nXavriq  God  shall  send 
upon  them  the  powerful  influence  of  delusion  ;  although  he  had  im- 
mediately before  in  v.  9,  10,  attributed  this  Ivigyna,  or  influence  to 
Satan."  2  Thess.  2:  11. 

III.  5.  The  belief  of  a  divine  providence  in  general,  is  sufficient 
to  tranquillize  a  mind  filled  with  reverence  for  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  God  (1  Pet.  6:  7),  even  if  his  designs  in  numerous  in- 
stances cannot  be  ascertained  (<§>  22.  Illust.  1).  But  w^e  must  be 
particularly  careful,  on  the  one  hand,  not  to  be  elated  by  prosperity, 
as  though  it  were  a  certain  evidence  of  our  excellence  ;  for  frequent- 
ly God  sends  us  prosperity  in  order  to  lead  us  to  repentance  ;^  and 
if  this  object  be  not  attained,^  we  may  soon  experience  a  sad  re- 
verse. And  on  the  other  hand,  we  must  feel  ourselves  under  sa- 
cred obligation,  not  to  suffer  our  own  afflictions  to  impair  our  confi- 
dence in  the  goodness  of  God,  nor  to  regard  the  misfortunes  of  oth- 
ers as  evidence  of  the  sinfuless  of  their  thoughts  and  actions.^  For, 
as  God,  under  whose  wise  providence  afflictions  come  on  men,  may 
have  very  different  objects  in  view  in  them,  every  such  judgment 
must  be  uncharitable,  and  very  often  false.  Job  42:  7,  8.  John  9: 
2,  3.  Matt.  5:  11,  12.  1  Cor.  4:  9—13. 

III.  6  It  is  evident  that  God  has  some  design  in  those  occur- 
rences which  are  produced  by  the  operation  of  natural  causes.  This 
is  proved  by  those  occurrences  while  predicting  which  God  declar- 
ed expressly  the  end  that  he  would  accomplish  by  them,  but  which 
nevertheless  seem  to  have  been  effected  by  mere  human  agency. 
Amos  3:  6,  7,  2,  nir^  Nb  nin"*!  n3?n  J^:.rIr^-t3^^  shall  there  be  an 
evil,  and  the  Lord  hath  not  done  it  ?  Is.  10:  5,  i2,  15  (comp  v.  7). 
Luke  19:42—44.  11:49—51.  21:22.  Matt.  20:  28.  (compare 
Matt.  17:  12).  See  Koppen's  "The  Bible  a  work  of  divine  wis- 
dom," Vol.  I.  p.  268  etc. 

1  Mstdvounv  Luke  13:  8.  Rotn.  2:  4. 

2  Rom.  2:  5.  Luke  13:  3,  5.  16:  25.  3  Luke  13:  2—5. 
33 


^58  CREATION  AND  PROVmENCE.  [bK.  II. 


SECTION  XL. 

A  sincere  confidence  in  the  unbounded 'power  and  agency  of  God  in 
the  world,  Leads  to  no  injurious  results. 

Such  a  confidence  in  the  providence  of  God,  affords  no  encour- 
agement either  to  indolence  or  presumption.  For,  this  confidence 
takes  it  for  a  conceded  fact  (<5>  39,)  that  God  exerts  no  extraordinary- 
agency,  excepting  when  the  ordinary  course  of  nature  does  not  har- 
monize with  his  purposes.  But  we  cannot  determine  what  the  di- 
vine purposes  are  (<§>  22.  Illust.  1 ;)  yet  this  we  certainly  know,  that 
indolence(l)  and  presumption(2)  are  displeasing  to  God(3 ;)  and 
we  have  no  reason  to  expect,  that  God  will  exert  an  extraordinary 
influence  to  counteract  the  consequences  of  these  sins.(4) 

Illustration  1. 

1  Thess.  4:  11,  Tigdaafiv  ra  idta,  xaligyaCfGi^attaTg idiaig x^Qf^lt^ 
to  transact  your  own  business,  and  to  work  with  your  own  hands. 
2  Thess.  3:  6  etc.  Luke  16:  10—12.  Matt.  25:  26. 

III.  2.  Matt.  4:  5 — 7,  ovx  ixnttgaaeig  xvgtov  tov  &i6v  gov 
thou  shalt  not  make  trial  of  the  Lord  thy  God. 

III.  3.  Although  Paul,  in  his  voyage  to  Italy  (Acts  ch.  27,)  had 
received  a  divine  assurance  of  the  happy  results  of  the  perils  of  the 
ship's  company  (v.  23,  25,)  still  he  did  not  neglect  to  employ  hu- 
man assistance  and  precaution  (v.  31,  34.)  Though  convinced  that 
it  was  the  intention  of  God  to  save  the  persons  in  the  ship,  he  was 
also  persuaded  that  human  prudence  and  exertion  must  cooperate 
for  the  accomplishment  of  the  end. 

III.  4.     See  Prov.  6:  9—11.  24:  30  etc.  13:  4,  5. 


SECTION   XLI. 

Conclusion. 

As  the  providence  of  God  in  the  affairs  of  men,  has  been  mani- 
fested in  an  arrangement  of  a  very  peculiar  nature,  an  arrangement 


^41.]  CONCLUSION.  25S 

deserving  of  our  highest  regard,  as  well  on  account  of  its  intrinsic 
nature  as  of  its  reference  to  tw  ;  it  is  necessary  that  this  arrangement 
(for  our  salvation  through  Christ)  should  be  considered  more  speci- 
fically and  at  large.  This  shall  be  done  in  the  second  chapter  o! 
the  third  book,  and  in  the  fourth  book.  But  as  this  same  arrange- 
ment has  given  us  some  new  views  of  God  himself,  and  has  also 
cast  some  new  light  on  the  subject  of  Creation  and  Providence,  dis- 
cussed in  this  second  book  ;  it  is  necessary  to  add  a  supplement  to 
it,  which  is  contained  in  the  following  Third  Part. 


PART  III. 

OF  GOD,  AS   FATHER,  SON,  AND  HOLY  GHOST. 

SECTION  XLII. 

Christ  is  god,  and  is  called  god  in  the  highest  sense. 

Christ,  the  Being  through  whose  instrumentality  (^  6 — 8,  65,  4 
etc.)  God  accomplishes  the  purposes  of  his  special  providence  over 
man  (<^  41,)  is  represented  to  us  as  not  being  a  mere  man  ;(1)  for 
to  him  the  Scriptures  ascribe  an  existence  before  his  human  birth, 
(2)  and  even  prior  to  the  beginning  of  the  world  :(3)  in  short,  they 
attribute  to  him  an  eterna1{4)  existence.  Nor  can  it  be  deemed 
strange,  that  this  divine  attribute, (5)  as  well  as  other  perfections  of 
God, (6)  together  with  that  adoration(7)  which  results  from  them, 
and  which  can  properly  belong  only  to  the  divine  Being, (8)  should 
be  ascribed  to  Christ ;  inasmuch  as  even  the  Scriptural  representa- 
tion of  the  true  God  (<§>  20, 33,)  is  also  transferred  to  him. (9)  And 
hence  we  may  easily  determine,  in  what  sense(lO)  the  name 
God(ll)  is  apphed  to  him.(12) 

Illustration  1. 

Evidence  of  the  twofold  nature  of  Christ. 

The  fact  that  Christ  possesses  another  nature,  in  addition  to  the 
aaal^  or  human  nature,  is  proved  by  the  following  passages  :  John 
6:  62,  iai>  ovv  ^fugrjis  zov  vlov  tov  dvOgatnov  uva^uivovra  onov^fV 
JO  ngoifQOV'^  what  if  ye  should  see  the  son  of  man  ascending  thither 
where  he  was  before  ?  16:  28,  llrjX&ov  nagd  tov  nargog,  xat  iXriXv- 
&u  elg  TOV  y.06(.tov'  naXiv  afplrjfn  lov  x6of.iov,  xat  nogavofiOLV  ngog  tov 
naxiga  I  departed  from  the  Father  and  came  into  the  world  ;  again, 
I  leave  the  world,  and  go  to  the  Father.  8:  14,  Jesus  answered 
and  said  unto  them,  Though  I  bear  record  of  myself,  my  record  is 
true  ;  for  I  know  whence  1  came  and  whither  I  go  ;  but  ye  cannot 
tell  whence  1  came  and  whither  I  go.  3:  11,  Verily,  verily,  I  say 
unto  thee,  we  speak  what  we  know,  and  testify  that  which 
we  have  seen ;  and  ye  receive  not  our  testimony,  v.  4,  For 
none  ascendeth  into   heaven,  but  he  who  descended  from  heaven, 

1  Rom.  1:  3.  9:  5. 


^42.]  THE  TWOFOLD  NATURE  OF  CHRIST.  261 

the  Son  of  man,  who  is  in  heaven  [whose  abode  is  in  heaven.]  6: 
46,  Not  that  any  man  hath  seen  the  Father,  except  him  who  is  from 
God  ;  he  hath  seen  the  Father,  v.  33,  For  the  bread  of  God  is  that 
(o — agzog)  which  descendeth  from  heaven  and  giveth  life  to  the 
world.  V.  38,  For  I  came  down  from  heaven,  not  to  do  mine  own 
will,  but  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me  ;  comp.  v.  50  etc.  8:  23, 
And  he  said  unto  them.  Ye  are  from  beneath ;  eyco  ix  rtoj/  avoj  eifil 
I  am  from  above.  1  Cor.  15:  47 — 49,  The  first  man  is  made  of 
earth,  and  is  earthy  ;  but  the  Second  Man  is  xvQiog  tl  ovgavov  ihe 
Lord  who  came  from  heaven. 

The  passage  1  Tim.  3:  16,  (Great  unquestionably  is  the  mystery 
of  godliness  [the  divine  secret,]  God  was  manifested  in  the  flesh  etc.,) 
even  on  the  supposition  that  6'?,  and  not  &  t  6  g/\s  the  true  reading  ; 
proves  at  least,  that  there  was  in  Christ  a  nature  different  from  that 
feeble  human  nature  in  which  he  appeared.     In  the  Programm,  re- 
ferred to  in  the  margin,  reasons  are  assigned,  to  prove  that  the  sense 
of  this  text  will  be  the  same,  whether  og  or  {^eog  be  the  true  read- 
ing ;    and    the   words  og  icpuvsgM&r]  iv  oagxl  are    explained   thus  : 
"  The  words  og—do^tj,  might  easily  be  so  construed,  that  the  first 
clause  6g  icpavsQwd^ri  iif  aagxi  should  be  the  subject,  and  all  the 
subsequent  propositions,  predicates.     But  in  this  case,  the  inspired 
writer  would  have  said,  o  t(favfg(adelg  iv  aagxt,  in  order  to  distin- 
guish the  subject  from  the  several  predicates  which  follow.     It  is, 
therefore,  better  to  refer  og  to  the  preceding  word  fivarrjQtov^  and  to 
translate  (per  synesin)  thus  :  "  The  great  secret,  the  subject  of  which 
etc.  (cujus  objectum,  materies  ;)  i.  e.  the  person  who  was  the  sub- 
ject of  this  great  secret  etc."     In   1  Tim.  6:  10,  cpdagyuglaj  rig 
(cujus  objectum,  sive  materies,)  and  in  Col.  1:  27,  oglaiv  Xgiaiog, 
the  relative  pronoun  og  has  the  same  signification,  as  we  give  it  here 
by  referring  og  to  fivati^gtop  immediately  preceding.     Agreeably  to 
this  explanation  of  og,  the  words  og—aagal  presuppose  a  higher  in- 
visible nature  of  Christ ;  or  they  must  be  understood  thus  :  "  A  high- 
er being  which  was  united  with  Christ,  made  his  appearance  as  a 
man."     For  if  Paul  had  merely  intended  to  say,  "  He  (the  man 
Jesus)  appeared  as  a  weak  man  ;"  then  the  cfavtgwaig  iv  aagxl  of 
Christ,  on  the  supposition  of  his  having  been  a  mere  man,  was  some- 
thing so   perfectly  natural,  that   it  [his   appearance]    could  not  be 
represented  as  being  f^iya  fivaitigtov  a  great  mystery,  or  any  part  of 
one.  This  is  corroborated  by  the  following  words  :  idixatcoi^t]  iv  nvev- 
fiaii,  when  explained  thus  :  "  the  professions  of  Jesus  relative  to  his 
superior  dignity,  which  seemed  to  be  inconsistent  with  his  appear- 
ance in  frail  human  nature,  were  proved  true  (justified,  confirmed,) 
by  his  subsequent  glorious  happiness,  7iv£vfia—dvflrjq)&T]  iv  do^rj." 
If  Paul  referred,  in  these  words,  to  another  and  a  higher  nature  of 
Christ,  distinct  from  the  man  Jesus ;  it  was  the  same  nature  which 


262  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

he  ascribes  to  Christ  in  other  passages,  namely,  a  divine  nature,  in 
the  highest  sense  of  the  word. 

The  twofold  nature  of  Christ,  is  also  proved  by  the  fact,  that  he 
is  often  distinguished  from  men.  Gal.  1:1,  10 — 12,  An  apostle,  not 
by  man^  but  by  Jesus  Christ.  1  Cor.  7:  22  etc.  If  any  one  who  is 
a  servant,  is  called  of  the  Lord  [converted  to  Christianity,]  he  is 
made  free  by  the  Lord  [he  enjoys  the  liberty  of  the  children  of 
God  ;]  and  in  like  manner,  if  a  free  man  is  called  [converted,]  he 
becomes  the  servant  of  Christ  etc.  Eph.  6:  6  etc.  Not  with  eye 
service  as  pleasing  men,  but  as  the  servants  of  Christ,  doing  the  will 
of  God  with  sincerity  of  heart.  Col.  3:  23  etc.  And  whatsoever  ye 
do,  do  it  from  the  heart,  as  to  the  Lord,  and  not  unto  men  : — for  ye 
serve  the  Lord  Christ.  Heb.  7:  28,  For  the  law  makes  feeble  men 
highpriests  ;  but  the  declaration,  which  has  been  made  since  the 
law,  and  which  was  confirmed  by  an  oath  (Ps.  110:4,)  makes  the 
Son  Highpriest,  who  is  raised  forever  into  glory. 

See  the  Dissertation  of  Dionys.  van  de  Wijnpersse,  entitled,  "  A 
vindication  of  the  true  and  eternal  divinity  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
against  the  more  recent  objections  to  it,"  which  is  found  in  the  work 
of  the  society  at  the  Hague,  For  the  defence  of  the  christian  reli- 
gion (1792).  This  dissertation  proves  in  the  happiest  manner,  how 
utterly  inconsistent  with  the  whole  spirit  of  the  New  Testament,  is 
the  supposition  that  Christ  was  a  mere  man  ;  and  how  perfectly  that 
spirit  harmonizes  with  doctrines  maintained  in  this  paragraph  (•§>  42). 

III.  2.     The  existence  of  Christ,  before  his  appearance  in  the  flesh. 

Proof  of  this  is  found  in  the  two  following  passages  of  John's 
Gospel : 

L  John  8:  58,  *^fii]v,  af^i^v,  Xeyo)  v[uv'  nglv  '^[igaoifi  yeviad^at', 
iifil  verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  before  Abraham  was,  1  am. 

The  following  translation  of  this  passage  is  given  in  the  works  re- 
ferred to :  "  Before  Abraham  was,  I  existed."  Wetstein  (on  John 
8:  58)  does  indeed  observe,  "  Desidero  locum  Scripturae,  ubi  i  y  cu 
sifxt  significat,  ego  eram  (I  existed),  vel  ego  5Mm  simpliciter ;"  but 
there  is  no  necessity  for  such  a  passage,  if  it  can  only  be  proved 
that  ehai^  has  the  signification  to  exist ;  and  this  it  certainly  has  in 
John  17:  5 ;  as  also  its  participle  ovza  in  Rom.  4:  17.  This  trans- 
lation is  vindicated  against  the  explanations  of  the  Socinians  and 
others,  (who  supply  to  elfil,  either  Xgiarog  or  some  other  predicate 
consisting  of  a  word  or  proposition),  on  the  following  grounds  : 

1.  Agreeably  to  the  idiom  of  the  Hebrew,  and  also  of  the  Evan- 
gelist John,  the  present  etf^i  may  be  used  instead  of  the  imperfect  ^v, 
see  1  John  3:  7.  2:  29.  4:  17.  This,  says  Bengel,  is  particularly 
the  case,  when  that  which  is  affirmed  to  have  been,  still  continues 


^  42.]  PREEXISTENCE  OF  CHRIST.  263 

to  he  ;  and  thus  the  sense  of  both  the  present  and  preterite  is  com- 
prehended in  the  present ;  as  in  John  15:  27,  ioii.  Jer.  1:  5 
(LXX),  inlatafAal  Of. 

2.  The  explanation,  "  Before  Abraham  was,  I  was  appointed  to 
be  the  Messiah,"  (which  is  adopted  by  Lofler,  in  the  German  ver- 
sion of  Souverain's  Essay  on  the  Platonism  of  the  Fathers  of  the 
church  p.  385,  and  in  Eichhorn's  Bibl.  Vll.  p.  1027)  is  certainly 
not  founded  on  the  words  iy(6  elfii.  The  phrase  o  XgcoTog,  or  6 
igxo^evog,  if  applied  to  fi^i,  should  stand  immediately  before  it,  and 
in  the  context  as  it  does  in  ch.  4:  26 ;  but  this  is  not  the  case  here. 
So  Ziegler  says  :  "  The  explanation,  '  I  was  appointed  to  be  the 
Messiah,'  is  unsupported  by  a  satisfactory  proof  of  such  an  idiom  ; 
and  consequently  this  passage  itself  cannot  be  used  as  such  a  proof."^ 

3.  Another  explanation,  (given  in  the  Allgem.  Litter.  Zeitung,) 
is  this  :^  "Before  Abraham  was  born,  I  am  he,  at  whose  day  he 
sincerely  rejoiced,  i.  e.  1  am  the  Messiah."  To  this  view  of  the 
text,  the  following  objections  present  themselves  :  (a)  Christ  would, 
on  this  supposition,  merely  repeat  (In  v.  58)  what  he  had  previous- 
ly said  (v.  56),  in  the  words  *^^Qaa^  riyuXhaaaio,'ivu  idr]  jrjv  iqut- 
gav  T-^v  l^i]v.  For,  the  assertion  lyio  dni  or  "  I  am  he,"  at  whose 
day  Abraham  rejoiced,  is  already  contained  in  l^^v. — (b)  The  words 
tiqIv  'j^Qaa^i  yei^taifao,  would  not  only  be  superfluous,  but  would 
appear  unnatural,  if  Jesus  had  Intended  by  the  words  "  I  am  he  to 
see  whose  day  Abraham  rejoiced,"  to  represent  himself  simply  as 
the  Messiah  ;'  and  this  without  regarding  the  question  of  the  Jews 
(v.  57),  but  passing  it  by  altogether,  as  unworthy  of  notice. — (c) 
Nothing  which  can  suitably  be  supphed  to  iyoj  fifAt,  can  be  taken 
from  the  remote  56th  verse,  but  must  be  derived  from  the  57th 
verse  which  immediately  precedes  It  :  so  that  the  sense  would  be, 
iyoj  ftfAi,  og  iojgayie  top  'J^gaaiA,  i.  e.  "  1  am  he  that  knew  Abra- 
ham, before  he  was  born." — (d)  Agreeably  to  the  version,  "Before 
Abraham  was,  I  existed,"  the  passage  contains  the  proof  requisite 
to  support  the  assertion,  that  Jesus  is  greater  than  Abraham  (v.  53). 
This  proof  lies  in  his  preexistence  ;  and  Jesus  took  occasion  from 
the  question  of  the  Jews  (v.  57),  to  appeal  to  this  evidence  of  the 
dignity  of  his  person. 

II.  John  1:  15,  'O  oniom  fiov  igyo^evog,  tfiiigoGx^fv  fiov  ytyovtv' 
Qii  ngwiog  fiov  ^v  he  that  cometh  after  me,  is  preferred  to  me,  for 
he  was  before  me. 

In  the  work  referred  to  in  the  margin,  the  following  version  is 
given  of  this  passage  :  "  He  that  cometh  after  me,  goes  before  me 

1  See  Henke's  Magaz.  fur  Religionsphilosophie,  B.  V.  St.  2.  S.  262. 

2  Jahrg.  1793,  No.  295,296.  coitip.  Paulus'  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  John, 
p.  461  etc. 


264  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

is  greater  than  I,  v.  27,  ol — vnoKrifxaiog'  Matt.  3:  II,  laivQozfQog 
fiov  iaitv.  John  3:  31,  lnav(a  jiavimv  ear/]  ;  for  he  existed  before  I 
did."  And  the  remark  is  added,  "  that  the  Evangelist  probably  ad- 
duces this  declaration  of  the  Baptist,  in  opposition  to  the  objection 
which  was  advanced  against  Christianity,  at  least  by  the  later  disci- 
ples (<§>  16)  of  John  :  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Baptist  are  older 
than  those  of  Christ.  Ewald  remarks,  that  if  both  expressions, 
ifAngoG&i'i/  fiov  yiyovtv  and  nfjdiiog  fiov  tjv,  are  referred  to  any  other 
precedency  than  priority  of  time,  there  would  be  a  tautology.  And 
Kuinol  subjoins  the  additional  remark,  that  efAugon^ev  is  never  us- 
ed to  express  precedency  in  dignity  or  respectability,  either  in  the 
New  Testament  or  the  LXX,  or  in  the  profane  authors.  To  the 
explanation  of  these  words  given  by  Bolten,  who  refers  them  to  an 
earlier  residence  of  Jesus  near  the  Jordan  ;  Paulus  justly  objects, 
(a)  that  it  should  then  read,  nguiog  fiov  aide  i^v,  or  nag^v,  he  was 
here  before  me,  or  he  was  there  before  me  : — and  (b)  that  agreea- 
bly to  Matt.  3: 13,  Jesus  was  just  come  from  Galilee,  to  be  baptized. 

III.  3.     The  antemundane  existence  of  Christ, 

That  Christ  existed  prior  to  the  beginning  of  the  world,  is  evi- 
dent from  the  following  texts  : 

I.  John  1:  1,  '£v  dgxij  vv  6  }>6yog  in  the  beginning  was  the  word ;  ; 
comp.  V.  3.     In  the  w^ork  "  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John," 
the  version  of  the  words  iv  dgxri  "  in  the  beginning  of  the  world," 
is  vindicated  against  the  Socinian  translation,  "  in   the  beginning  of 
the  Gospel."     The  grounds  of  the  defence  are  the  following  :  1. 
The  position,  that  the  words  iv  ctgyrj,  when  standing  alone,  can  sig-  ^ 
nify  "  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel,"  is  altogether  unsupported  by- 
evidence.     In  Mark  1 :  1,  we  find  the  words  iv  dgyrj  tov  ivayysXlov,  ^ 
but  not  dgyri  alone. — 2.  It  is  evident  from  the  third  verse,  that  all 
created  things  must  be  conceived  as  not  existing  previously  to  this 
dgyri  or  beginning.     See  infra,  Illust.  9.  1. 

II.  John  17:  5,  24,  Ao^a^  y  elyov  ngo  rov  xov  xoGfiov  elvat,^  na- 
ga  ooi'-—Tr)v  do^av  trlv  f'/w^V,  i^v  i'ScDxdg  fiot,  art  ^ydnijadg  fit  ngo 
xaTa^oXrjg  xoafiov  the  glory  which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world 
was  : — my  glory,  which  thou  gavest  me,  because  thou  lovedst  me 
before  the  formation  of  the  world.  The  following  explanation  cf 
this  passage,  is  given  in  the  work  '^  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of 
John  :"  "  the  glory  which  thou  gavest  [art  about  to  give]  me,  be- 
cause thou  (as  I  was  with  thee  before  the  world  was)  didst  love  me 
before  the  world  was  formed." — In  opposition  to  another  exposition, 
(which  renders  the  words  in  v.  24  and  5,  do^a  tjv  edcondg  fioi,  and 
ri  el^Qv  nagd  aol,  thus  :  ''  the  glory  which  thou  didst  appoint  for  me 
or  which  I  had  agreeably  to  thine  eternal  appointment,")  the  form- 


^  42.]  ETERNITT  OP  CHRIST.  265 

er  version  is  supported  by  the  following  arguments  :  1.  In  the  oth- 
er passages,  Jesus  combines  together,  his  going  to  the  Father  when 
he  leaves  the  world,  and  his  existence  with  him  before  he  appeared 
on  earth.  John  3:  13.  6:  62.  16:  28.-2.  St.  John  himself  seems 
to  favour  the  former  explanation.  Compare  John  I:  2,  ovrog  vv 
iv  dgxy  TtQog  tov  d^eov^  and  1  John  1:2,  ?J  ^w»J  tJ  alojviog,  tjztg  r^v 
TiQog  TOV  nattga,  with  the  words  ^  eixov  nagd  aol  ngo  tov  top  noa- 
fAOv  elvai^  this  was  in  the  beginning  with  God — that  eternal  life 
which  was  with  the  Father — which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world 
was.  That  tx^tv  can  signify,  "  to  have  any  thing  in  purpose," 
which  is  maintained  by  Grotius  and  Wetstein,  is  denied  by  Ewald. 
[By  similar  phraseology,  the  existence  of  Christ  before  the  formation 
of  the  world,  is  expressed  in  Col.  1:  17,  xat  amog  iati,  ngo  ndvtiav 
*'  therefore  (because  he  is  the  Creator  of  all  things  v.  16)  he  also 
existed  before  all." 

III.  4.     The  eternity  of  Christ, 

That  Jesus  existed  from  eternity,  is  distinctly  taught,  in  1  John 
1:  2,  Ti^p  ^(ofjv  T^v  aifaviov^  rixig  tjv  ngog  tov  naztQcty  xai  iq)aveg(6{^i] 
f^iuv  (we  bear  witness,  and  show  unto  you)  that  eternal  life,  which 
was  with  the  Father,  and  was  manifested  unto  us.  Compare  with 
this,  Heb.  1:  10—12,  thou  Lord  (Christ,  v.  1 — 10)  in  the  begin- 
ning didst  lay  the  foundation  of  the  earth,  and  the  heavens  are  the 
work  of  thy  hands  ;  they  shall  be  destroyed,  but  thou  shalt  continue 
to  exist,  and  they  shall  all  grow  old  as  a  garment.  Rev.  22:  13, 
lyca  ilfxi  ?o  Anal  to  £1,  ngcoTog  nal  i'axctTog  I  am  the  Alpha  and  the 
Omega,  the  First  and  the  Last. 

In  the  New  Apology  for  the  Revelation,^  it  is  stated  that  these 
words  which  are  applied  to  Christ,  manifestly  contain  a  description 
of  the  true  God,  and  represent  him  as  the  Author  and  End  of 
the  whole  creation ;  for,  in  Rev.  21:  5,  6,  God  is  described  in  simi- 
lar terms  :  eyco  slfjii,  to  A  xal  to  i2,  ?J  dgxv  **«'  ^o  Ttkog.  The  same 
idea  is,  in  Rom.  11:  36,  expressed  thus  :  (J*'  amov  note  eig  avTOv  td 
ndvta,  and  in  Heb.  2:  10,  as  follows  :  do  ov  ra  navTa,  ital  di,  ov  r« 
ndvta.  Michaelis^  indeed  thinks  it  possible,  that  the  words  iyw  eifAi> 
6  ngbitog  ^al  6  taxotTog,  in  the  two  passages  Rev.  1:  17.  2: 8,  should 
signify,  "  I  am  the  first  whom  thou  didst  know  as  a  mortal,  and  the 
last  whom  now  immortal,  thou  shalt  again  see  ;  i.  e.  I  am  still  the 
same  whom  thou  hast  known."  And  his  reason  is,  that  in  both 
these  passages,  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  is  spoken  of  immediately 
after.  But  in  Rev.  22:  15,  at  least,  there  is  no  allusion  to  the  re- 
surrection of  Christ  from  the  dead. 

1  p.  381  etc.  (Illust.  7.  inf.)  2  Introd.  to  N.  T.  3d  ed.  d.  1352. 

34 


266  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

III.  5.  1  John  5:  20,  o  ciXf}&ivog  '&€og  xal  ri  ^torj  aiavwg  the 
true  God  and  eternal  life.  Rev.  21:  6.  Is.  44:  6.  48:  12,  "'Sfci 
■ji^riN  '';^?-^Ji  ]T^&t-)  I  am  the  First  and  the  Last.  Compare  4  297 

III.  6.     Other  divine  attributes  ascribed  to  Christ. 

1.  Omnijwtence :  Phil.  3:  21,  m'^^/f^a  tov  dvvaG&ai,  aurov  Kat 
vnoTulav  iavza  xcc  navTcc  the  power  by  which  also  he  is  able  to  sub- 
due all  things  to  himself.  Compare  John  10:  28 — 30.  In  the  work 
on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  the  sense  of  this  last  passage 
is  given  thus  :  "  As  the  Father  is  greater  than  all,  so  that  no  enemy- 
can  wrest  those  who  are  mine,  out  of  his  hands  (v.  29) ;  in  like 
manner,  nothing  can  wrest  them  out  of  my  hands  (v.  28)  ;  for  I  and 
the  Father  are  one  ;  we  are  .so  united,  that  the  dominion  and  the 
omnipotent  power  of  the  Father  are  mine."  The  explanation  of 
the  words  tf  la^ev^  as  signifying  an  agreement  of  the  Son  with  the 
Father,  in  their  views  and  feelings  in  regard  to  the  improvement  of 
the  human  family,  is  exposed  to  the  following  difficulties :  (a)  It  is 
not  proved,  that  ev  dvai  is  frequently  synonymous  with  to  avto 
(f'Qoveii^  or  to  be  of  one  mind.  Even  in  John  17:  11,  iv  nvav  does 
not  necessarily  refer  merely  to  oneness  or  similarity  of  views,  but 
can  very  naturally  include  union  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  same  priv- 
ileges, hopes,  and  happiness,  (b)  The  context  of  this  passage  (10: 
28 — 30)  leads  us  to  the  explanation  above.  For  Jesus  uses  the 
same  expressions  in  v.  29  and  28,  "  No  one  can  wrest  my  sheep 
from  the  Father's  hand — no  one  shall  wrest  them  out  of  my  hand." 
Both  clauses  must  therefore  be  understood  alike,  and  as  the  first  is 
deduced  from  the  power  of  the  Father  (o  nui^g  fiov  fieiCcov  -navitov 
toil  V.  29)  ;  so  also  must  the  latter,  namely,  the  impossibility  of 
wresting  the  sheep  of  Christ  out  of  his  hands,  be  grounded  on  the 
protecting  power  of  Christ ;  and  this  is  confirmed  by  the  preceding 
words  xayco  ^Mrjv  amviov  didcofii  avtolg  1  give  them  my  salvation. 
John  10:  18,  ttovalav  6/w  d^eivav  avifjv  {t7]v  ipvx^^v),  icui  i^ovaiav 
i'Xdi  ndhv  Xa^Hv  umriv  I  have  power  to  lay  down  my  life,  and 
I  have  power  to  resume  it.  In  ch.  2: 19  he  says.  Destroy  this  tem- 
ple, and  I  will  build  it  again  in  three  days ;  and  in  other  passages, 
his  resurrection  is  ascribed  to  God,  e.  g.  Acts  2:  24,  32.  3:  13,  15, 
5:  30.  1  Cor.  6:  14.  15:  15.  Divine  power  [-^ila  dvvufitg^  is  also 
ascribed  to  Christ,  in  2  Pet.  1:  3.  comp.  v.  16  dvvafiig  and  ju^ya- 
IsiOTTjg.     For,  amov  (v.  3)   must  refer  to  ^Jtjaov  tov  xvqIov  ?Jjuojv 

2.  Omniscience  is  ascribed  to  Christ,  in  1  Cor.  4:  5.    Rev.  2: 
23.— [Matt.  11:27,  "  All  things  are  delivered  to  me  of  my  Father ;  | 
and  no  man  knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father  ;  neither  knoweth  any  | 
man  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  | 
reveal  him."  ! 


^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST OMNISCIENCE.  267 


If  in  this  passage,  the  same  omniscience  be  not  ascribed  to  the 
Son  as  to  the  Father  ;  I  am  unable  to  make  out  satisfactorily  what 
the  meaning  of  it  is.  In  the  latter  clause  of  the  verse,  men  are  de- 
clared to  be  entirely  dependent  on  the  Son  for  that  knowledge  of 
the  Father  which  is  revealed  ;  i.  e.  he  only  makes  this  revelation. 
John  1:  18,  "  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the  only  begot- 
ten who  dwelleth  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  revealed  him" 
At  the  same  time  I  concede,  it  is  possible,  that  the  knowledge  here 
spoken  of,  may  be  merely  that  which  is  intended  to  be  revealed  in 
the  Gospel, 

John  6:  46,  "  Because  that  no  man  hath  seen  the  Father,  save 
he  which  is  of  God,  he  hath  seen  the  Father."  The  word  irogaas 
here,  does  not  mean  to  see  with  bodily  eyes,  but  with  the  mental 

e,  i.  e.  to  know.  What  but  omniscience  could  be  adequate  to 
the  knowledge  here  predicated  of  Christ?  And  is  it  a  satisfactory 
explanation  of  the  text  to  say,  that  the  knowledge  here  meant,  is 
simply  that  which  is  conveyed  in  the  instructions  of  the  Gospel  ? 

In  the  same  manner,  the  knowledge  of  the  most  intimate  secrets 
of  the  human  heart,  is  ascribed  to  Christ.  John  2:  24,  25,  "  But 
Jesus  did  not  commit  himself  unto  them,  because  he  knew  all  men  ; 
tand  needed  not  that  any  should  testify  of  man  ;  for  he  knew  what 
was  in  man."  John  6:  64,  "  But  there  are  some  of  you  that  be- 
lieve not.  For  Jesus  knew  who  they  were  that  beheved  not,  and 
who  should  betray  him." 

Acts  1:24,  "And  they  prayed,  and  said.  Thou,  Lord,  which 
knowest  the  hearts  of  all  men,  shew  whether  of  these  two  thou  hast 
chosen."  That  Lord  {xvgiog)  here  means  Christ,  seems  to  me 
very  plain  from  verses  21  and  22  (compare  verse  6)  of  the  context. 
Besides,  this  is  the  common  appellation  of  the  Saviour,  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles.  The  appeal  made  in  this  case,  respects  the  choice 
of  an  apostle,  "  Sliew,  Lord,"  say  the  apostles,  "which  of  these 
two  THOU  hast  chosen  ;  that  he  may  take  part  of  this  ministry  and 

E*-^vostleshipJ^  Is  there  any  room  to  doubt,  here,  that  the  apostles 
d  appeal  to  the  same  Lord  who  had  chosen  them,  to  designate 
ho  shall  fill  the  vacancy  occasioned  by  the  death  of  Judas  ? 
1  Cor.  4:  4,  5,  "  For  I  know  nothing  by  myself;  yet  am  I  not 
hereby  justified  ;  but  he  that  judgeth  me  is  the  Lord.  Therefore 
judge  nothing  before  the  time,  until  the  Lord  come,  who  both  will 
ibring  to  light  the  hidden  things  of  darkness,  and  will  make  manifest 
the  counsels  of  the  hearts ;  and  then  shall  every  man  have  praise 
of  God."  That  Lord  (xvgiog)  here  means  Christ,  is  plain,  both 
ifrom  the  office  of  judging  ascribed  to  him,  and  from  his  coming  to 
iJudgment.  Without  citing  numerous  other  passages,  which  confes- 
isedly  represent  Christ  as  the  final  Judge  of  all  the  human  race ; 


268  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

permit  me  here  to  ask,  Is  it  possible  for  any  being  who  is  not  om- 
niscient, to  judge  the  universe  of  intelligent  creatures  ?  Can  he  for 
thousands  of  years,  (possibly  of  ages),  be  present  every  where,  and 
know  what  is  transacted  ;  can  he  penetrate  the  recesses  of  the  hu- 
man heart ;  can  he  remember  the  whole  character  and  actions  of 
countless  myriads  so  diverse  in  talents,  temper,  circumstances,  and 
situation  ; — and  yet  be  finite  ?  be  neither  omnipresent  nor  omnis- 
cient 1  God  claims  it  as  his  distinguishing  and  peculiar  prerogative, 
that  he  knows  the  secrets  of  the  human  heart  (Jer.  17:  10)  ;  what 
then  must  he  be,  who  knows  the  secrets  of  all  hearts  at  all  times, 
and  in  all  worlds  ?  If  he  be  not  God,  the  proof  that  the  Father  is 
God,  is  defective  too ;  and  we  have  the  question  again  to  dispute 
with  the  Manicheans,  whether  Jehovah  be  not  a  limited  and  imper- 
fect being. 

"  But,"  you  will  say,  "  Christ  acts  as  Judge  by  delegated  au- 
thority :  why  not  then,  by  knowledge  imparted  to  him  ?"  He  does 
indeed  act  as  Judge  by  delegated  authority,  because  it  is  in  his  me- 
diatorial capacity  that  he  acts  as  Judge ;  but  to  act  as  Judge  is  one 
thing,  to  be  qualified  for  such  an  office  is  another.  Exaltation  as 
Mediator  constitutes  him  Judge  in  that  capacity  ;  omnipresence  and 
omniscience  only  cdiu  qualify  him  for  the  duties  of  that  station.  And 
can  omniscience  be  imparted  1  We  may  as  well  say  omnipotence  or 
ielf-existence  can  be  imparted.  There  is,  and  there  can  be  but  one 
God  ;  and  a  second  omniscient  being,  (omniscient  simply  by  knowl- 
edge imparted),  would  force  us  into  all  the  absurdities  of  polytheism. 

Rev.  2:  23,  "  And  all  the  churches  shall  know  that  I  am  he 
which  searcheth  the  reins  and  hearts ;  and  I  will  give  unto  every 
one  of  you  according  to  your  works."  The  same  person  speaks 
here,  who  "  was  dead  and  is  alive,"  i.  e.  Christ  (chap.  1:18).  The 
sense  of  the  passage  is  too  plain  to  need  any  comment. 

To  conclude  this  head  :  when  I  compare  such  passages  as  those 
nbove  cited,  with  the  description  of  divine  omniscience,  how  can  I 
doubt  that  the  New  Testament  writers  mean  to  ascribe  the  knowl- 
edge of  all  things  to  Christ  ?  To  say  that  whatsoever  pertains  to 
God  or  man,  is  known  by  any  being,  is  to  predicate  omniscience  of 
that  being.  Compare  now  with  this,  the  knowledge  which  God  as- 
cribes to  himself  only,  in  Jer.  17:  9,  10,  "  The  heart  is  deceitful 
above  all  things,  and  desperately  wicked  ;  who  can  know  it  ?  I  the 
Lord  search  the  heart,  1  try  the  reins,  even  to  give  to  every  man 
according  to  his  ways,  and  according  to  the  fruit  of  his  doings."^] 

[1  See  "  Letters  to  the  Rev.  \Vm.  E.  Channing  etc."  on  the  divinity  of  Christ, 
by  Professor  Stuart ;  from  which  the  above  paragraphs  relative  to  the  omnis- 
cience of  Christ,  are  extracted.    S] 


§  42.]  ATTRIB.  OF  CHRIST HONOUR,  WORSHIP.  269 

III.  7.     Divine  honour  and  worship  are  ascribed  to  Christ. 

I.  John  5:  23, ^'/va  navieg  iifAcjot  tov  vlov,  ^ci{^o]g  TifAojtn  tovna- 
UQci  that  all  men  should  honour  the  Son,  as  they  honour  the  Father. 

Even  allowing  that  aad^wg  would  admit  of  such  an  explanation  as 
would  not  imply  a  similar  adoration  of  the  Father  and  of  Christ ; 
still,  in  the  passage  before  us,  the  context  will  not  admit  of  such  an 
exposition.  Because  (a)  in  v.  27 — 29,  Christ  ascribes  divine  works 
to  himself;  and  in  v.  21,  an  equahty  with  the  Father. — (b)  As  the 
Jews  (v.  18)  immediately  preceding,  had  pronounced  a  declaration 
made  by  Jesus,  to  be  blasphemy,  and  charged  him  with  "  making 
himself  equal  with  God"  laov  iaviov  novel  to7  d^m'  Jesus  would 
have  been  bound,  by  his  reverence  for  God  and  love  to  his  hearers, 
to  avoid  using  an  expression  which  could  so  naturally  be  understood 
as  indicating  divine  worship ;  and  it  would  have  been  his  duty  dis- 
tinctly to  declare,  that  he  did  not  desire  any  thing  of  this  kind. 

II.  John  14:  1,  13,  14,  lav  xi  ahriarixt  h  rw  ovof^att  fiov,  iycu 
noirioo)  if  ye  ask  any  thing  in  my  name,  I  will  do  it. 

Jesus  here  directs  the  apostles  to  pray  in  a  manner  that  will  be  to 
his  honour  [Iv  ovofiaxi,  comp.  <§>  43.  lllust.  4),  i.  e.  to  pray  with 
the  confident  expectation  that  he  would  grant  their  petition  (v.  1). 
Through  the  Son,  by  his  answering  the  prayers  of  his  people,  the 
glory  of  the  Father  was  to  be  manifested,  iVa  do^ao-d^  6  narrjQ  Iv 
rqJ  VIM  that  the  Father  may  be  glorified  in  the  Son ;  (v.  7 — 9.  «§> 
44.  lllust.  9). 

III.  1  Cor.  1:  2,  Iniyiakov^ivov  %o  ovof^atov  ytvgiov  f]fi(ov*Jrjaou 
Xqigtov  who  worship  [call  on  the  name  of]  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.^ 
Acts  7:  59,  Inixalov^evov  aat  Xtyovia'  xvgie  'Jtjaov  (and  they  ston- 
ed Stephen)  calling  upon  [Jesus]  and  saying :  Lord  Jesus,  (receive 
my  spirit).  The  first  of  the  two  passages  here  adduced  as  a  proof 
of  the  divine  honour  due  to  Christ,  is  of  divine  authority,  because  it 
declares  that  the  apostle  (Paul)  sanctions  the  worship  of  Christ; 
which  he  also  confirmed  by  his  own  example,  2  Cor.  12:  8.  1 
Thess.  3:  11.  2  Thess.  2:  16,  17.  Rom,  1;  7.  1  Cor.  1:  3.  2  Cor. 
1:  2  etc.  Eph.  3:  6.  The  second  passage  has  divine  authority,  be- 
cause it  contains  the  expressions  of  Stephen,  who,  at  least  at  that 
time,  spoke  by  divine  inspiration,  nXrjgtjg  nvevf.ia.Tog  ayiov  v.  55. 
But  both  passages,  even  when  considered  as  historical  testimony, 
prove  that  in  the  apostolic  age  Christ  was  worshipped  as  God  by 
all  christian  churches   (1  Cor.  1:  2),  and  even  by  the  churches  in 

1  The  explanation  of  this  text,  as  signifying  "  who  are  called  after  the  namo 
of  Jesus  Christ,"  is  inconsistent  with  the  passages  hereafler  to  be  considered  : 
Acts.  7: 59.  Rom.  10:  9—13.  also  Acts  22:  16. 


270  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II.. 

Palestine  (Acts  9:  21,  14),  which  at  a  later  date  abandoned  the 
ancient  faith.^ 

The  well  known  passage  in  Pliny  :  "  Carmen  Christo  quasi  Deo 
dicere  secum  invicem"  (L.  X.  Ep.  97)  they  sing  a  hymn  together 
to  Christ  as  a  God,  refers  to  the  churches  situated  in  a  province  of 
Asia  Minor.  And  as  the  Gospel  of  John  had  been  published  in  the 
country  from  which  Pliny  wrote,  and  a  short  time  before  he  wrote 
his  epistle  ;  the  words  "  quasi  Deo,"  are  doubtless  to  be  understood 
agreeably  to  John  1:1,  The  Logos  {or  word)  was  God.  Eusebius 
also  (Hist.  Ecc.  V.  28,)  in  opposing  the  followers  of  Artemon,  ap- 
peals to  ancient  hymns  of  the  christians,  in  which  Christ  is  repre- 
sented as  God  :  ^'  ipaX/nol  di  oaoi  teal  codat  dd€Xq)6iv  an  aQ)^i]g  vno 
niaiojv  ygucpiJaatf  tov  Xoyov  tov  d^iov,  xov  Xqiotov,  vfivovot^  d^eoXo' 
yovvzeg.*'^  There  is  no  example  known  of  a  christian  church  in  the 

1  See  also,  on  the  divine  worship  of  Christ,  Rom.  10:  9 — 14.  Rev.  5:  8  etc. 
and  §  78. 

2  The  work  from  which  Eusebius  makes  this  quotation,  was  by  some  regarded 
as  the  production  of  Caius;  by  others  it  was  ascribed  to  Origen  ;  and  the  third 
and  most  probable  opinion  is,  that  it  was  the  work  of  an  anonymous  author,  and 
the  same  in  substance  as  that  which  Theodoret  calls  "  the  Little  Labyrinth." 
The  object  of  Eusebius  in  quoting  this  passage,  was,  to  prove  the  opinion,  that 
Christ  is  a  mere  man,  to  be  of  recent  date,  in  opposition  to  its  advocates,  who 
maintained  that  it  was  even  of  apostolic  origin  ;  and  as  the  whole  context  of 
Eusebius  reflects  light  on  the  subject  before  us,  I  will  translate  it  for  the  gratifica- 
tion of  the  reader.  "The  works  of  very  many  others  have  also  reached  us; 
whose  names  we  cannot  indeed  specify,  but  they  were  orthodox  and  ecclesiasti- 
cal [persons,]  as  is  proved  by  the  interpretation  given  by  each  of  them  of  the  di- 
vine Scriptures  ;  but  they  are  unknown  to  us,  because  their  names  are  not  pre- 
fixed to  their  books.  In  an  elaborate  piece  of  one  of  these  authors,  composed  a- 
gainst  the  heresy  of  Artemon,  (which  Paul  of  Samosata  has  attempted  to  revive 
in  our  age,)  there  is  extant  a  narrative  very  relevant  to  the  history  we  are  com- 
posing. For,  the  author,  in  proving  that  the  above  named  heresy,  which  makes 
the  Saviour  a  mere  man,  was  an  innovation  of  recent  date,  (the  propagators  of  it 
boasted  of  its  antiquity  ;)  after  saying  many  other  things  in  reprehension  of  their 
blasphemous  lies,  uses  the  following  language  :  *  they  assert  that  all  the  ancients 
and  oven  the  apostles  themselves,  believed  and  taught  the  same  things  which 
they  now  maintain  ;  and  that  the  preaching  of  the  truth  was  preserved  until  the 
times  of  Victor,  the  thirteenth  bishop  of  Rome  from  Peter  ;  but  that  from  the 
time  of  his  successor  Zephyrinus,  the  truth  had  been  corrupted.'  And  this 
assertion  of  theirs  might  perhaps  have  been  believed,  were  it  not  that  they  are 
contradicted,  first  by  the  divine  Scriptures  {d'siai  yQacpai,)  and  then  by  the  writ- 
ings of  some  brethren  more  ancient  than  the  times  of  Victor,  and  which  were 
composed  in  support  of  the  truth  against  the  gentiles,  and  against  the  heresies  of 
those  days.  I  refer  to  the  works  of  Justin,  Miltiades,  Talian,  Clement,  and 
many  others,  in  all  of  which  divinity  is  ascribed  to  Christ  (d'eoXoystrcu  Xqiotos.) 
For,  who  is  ignorant  of  the  books  of  Irenaeus  and  Melito  and  of  the  rest,  which 
declare  Christ  to  be  both  God  and  man  ?  Moreover,  all  the  psalms  and  hymns 
of  the  brethren,  vrritten  from  the  beginning  by  the  faithful,  celebrate  the  praises  of 
Christ,  the  Word  of  God,  and  attribute  divinity  to  him.  How  is  it  possible,  then, 
that  the  ancients  until  the  time  of  Victor,  should  have  taught  what  they  assert, 
when  the  opinion  of  the  church  through  so  many  years  is  declared  and  known  .? 
And  why  are  they  not  ashamed  to  assert  such  a  falsehood  concerning  Victor ; 
when  they  well  know  that  it  was  Victor  who  excommunicated  Theodotus  the 
currier,  the  father  and  chief  of  this  God-denying  apostacy  ;  for  Theodotus  was 


*5,  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST — WORSHIP.  271 

apostolic  age  which  can  be  shown  to  have  denied  those  personal 
excellencies  of  Jesus  which  John  ascribes  to  him.  The  sects  of  the 
Ebionites  and  other  Jewish  christians  in  Palestine,  who  denied  the 
deity  and  supernatural  conception  of  Christ,  or  at  least  the  former 
of  these  doctrines,  probably  took  their  rise  after  the  second  Jewish 
war,  when  one  part  of  the  Jewish  christians  separated  from  the  oth- 
ers, and  as  we  may  suppose,  attached  themselves  more  closely  to 
the  unbelieving  Jews.^ 

III.  8.  That  adoration  belongs  exclusively  to  God,  is  expressly 
taught  in  Is.  42:  8,  inN  Nb  ^'ni<b,  "^lii^^  I  will  not  give  my  honour  to 
another.  Jer.  17:  5  etc.  Matt:  4:  10,  compare  the  work  on  the  Ob- 
ject of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  505.  But  so  far  is  the  adoration  of 
Christ  from  being  idolatry,  that  it  is  represented  as  a  genuine  wor- 
ship of  God,  and  expressly  distinguished  from  idolatry,  1  Cor.  8:  4 
—6.  1  Thess.  5:  9.  1  John  5:  20.^ 

[The  following  remarks  on  the  subject  of  this  and  the  preceding 
Illustrations,  are  found  in  the  work  of  Professor  Stuart,  to  which 
reference  was  made  above.     S.] 

Heb.  1:6,"  Let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship  him." 

The  word  worship,  it  is  said,  has  two  significations  ;  viz.  obei- 
sance and  spiritual  homage.  This  is  true  ;  and  the  first  of  these 
meanings  often  presents  itself  in  the  Old  Testament  and,  (as  I  am 
willing  to  concede,)  in  the  Gospels.  Many  who  worshipped  Christ 
while  he  sojourned  among  men,  i.  e.  prostrated  themselves  before 
him,  probably  knew  or  acknowledged  nothing  of  his  divine  nature. 
But  what  shall  we  say  of  the  angels  ?  Are  they  ignorant  of  his  true 
nature  ?  And  is  not  the  worship  which  they  who  are  pure  spirits 
pay,  of  course  spiritual  and  not  simple  obeisance  ? 

Philip  2:  10,  11,  "  That  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should 
bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth,  and  things  under  the 
earth ;  and  that  every  tongue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father." 

"  Things  in  heaven,  earth,  and  under  the  earth,"  is  a  common 
periphrasis  of  the  Hebrew  and  New  Testament  writers,  for  the  uni- 
verse (xonoiv  orra  navTcx.)  What  can  be  meant, by  things  in  heav- 
en (i.  e.  beings  in  heaven)  bowing  the  knee  to  Jesus,  if  spiritual 
worship  be  not  meant  ? 

What  other  worship  can  heaven  render  ?  And  if  the  worship  of 
Christ  in  heaven  be  spiritual,  should  not  that  of  others,  who  ought  to 

the  first  that  declared  Christ  to  be  a  mere  man  ?"  Euseb.  Eccles.  Hist.  V.  27, 
28,  ed.  Valesii,  Amstd.  1695.  The  words  above  quoted  in  the  text,  are  here  print- 
ed in  italics.     S.] 

.    1  See  Weber's  Beitrage  zOr  Geschichte  des  Neutestamentlichen  Kanons,  p.  48 
Tubingen.  1791. 
2  See  the  Dissert,  sup.  cit  of  WijnperBse,  §  XVII.  p.  174  etc. 


272  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II, 

be  in  temper  united  with  them,  be  spiritual  also  ?  And  when  it  is 
added,  this  worship  shall  be  "  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father,"  I 
understand  the  sentiment  to  be,  that  Jesus  in  his  mediatorial  charac- 
ter is  the  proper  object  of  universal  adoration  ;  but  as  this  character 
has  a  peculiar  connexion  with  and  relation  to  God  the  Father,  so 
the  worship  paid  to  Christ  the  Mediator,  should  redound  to  the 
glory  of  the  Father  as  well  as  of  himself. 

Rom.  10:  9 — 14,  "That  if  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth 
the  Lord  Jesus,  and  shalt  believe  in  thine  heart  that  God  hath  raised 
him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved.  For  with  the  heart  man 
believeth  unto  righteousness  ;  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made 
unto  salvation.  For  the  Scripture  saith.  Whosoever  believeth  on 
him  shall  not  be  ashamed.  For  there  is  no  difference  between  the 
Jew  and  the  Greek  ;  for  the  same  Lord  over  all,  is  rich  unto  all 
that  call  upon  him.  For  whosoever  shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord,  shall  be  saved.  How  then  shall  they  call  on  him  in  whom 
they  have  not  believed  ?  and  how  shall  they  believe  in  him  of  whom 
they  have  not  heard  ?  and  how  shall  they  hear  without  a  preacher  ?" 
The  Lord  on  whose  name  they  are  to  call,  is  plainly  Christ ;  for 
he  is  the  same  in  whom  they  are  to  believe  (v.  11  and  14.)  And 
this  Lord,  (Christ,)  on  whom  they  are  to  call,  and  in  whom  they  are 
to  believe,  is  xvgiog  navrcov,  universal  Lord,  and  therefore  able  to 
bestow  the  blessings  which  they  need. 

Rev.  5:  8 — 14,  "  And  when  he,  (i.  e.  Christ,  see  v.  6,  7,)  took 
the  book,  the  four  beasts  and  four  and  twenty  elders  fell  down  be- 
fore the  Lamb,  having  every  one  of  them  harps  and  golden  vials 
full  of  odours,  which  are  the  prayers  of  the  saints.  And  they  sung 
a  new  song,  saying.  Thou  art  worthy  to  take  the  book,  and  to  open 
the  seals  thereof;  for  thou  wast  slain  and  hast  redeemed  us  to  God 
by  thy  blood,  out  of  every  kindred,  and  tongue,  and  people,  and  na- 
tion ;  and  hast  made  us  unto  our  God  kings  and  priests ;  and  we 
shall  reign  on  the  earth.  And  I  beheld  and  I  heard  the  voice  of 
many  angels  round  about  the  throne,  and  the  beasts  and  the  elders ; 
and  the  number  of  them  was  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand,  and 
thousands  of  thousands ;  saying  with  a  loud  voice,  Worthy  is  the 
Lamb  that  was  slain,  to  receive  power,  and  riches,  and  wisdom,  and 
strength,  and  honour,  and  glory  and  blessing.  And  every  creature 
which  is  in  heaven,  and  on  the  earth,  and  under  the  earth,  and  such 
as  are  in  the  sea,  and  all  that  are  in  them,  heard  I  saying.  Blessing, 
and  honour,  and  glory,  and  power,  be  unto  him  that  sitleth  upon  the 
throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb,  forever  and  ever.  And  the  four  beasts 
said.  Amen.  And  the  four  and  twenty  elders  fell  down  and  wor- 
shipped him  that  liveth  forever  and  ever." 

If  this  be  not  spiritual  worship — and  if  Christ  be  not  the  object 


^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHJIIST WORSHIP.  273 

of  it  here ;  I  am  unable  to  produce  a  case,  where  worship  can  be 
called  spiritual  and  divine. 

The  apostles  and  primitive  martyrs  tvorshipped  Christ ;  and  they 
recognize  the  practice  of  worshipping  him  among  other  Christians. 

Acts  7:  59,  60,  "  And  they  stoned  Stephen,  making  invocation 
{imnaXovfiivov)  and  saying,  Lord  Jesus,  receive  my  spirit.  And 
he  kneeled  down,  and  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  Lord,  lay  not  this  sin 
to  their  charge.     And  when  he  had  said  this  he  fell  asleep." 

Now  here  is  a  dying  martyr,  who  is  expressly  said  to  "  be  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  to  enjoy  the  vision  of  the  heavenly  world 
and  of  the  Saviour  who  was  there  ;  in  his  last  moments  too — on  the 
very  verge  of  eternity  ;  here  is  such  a  martyr,  commiting  his  de- 
parting spirit  into  the  hands  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  in  the  very  same 
language  and  with  the  same  confidence,  with  which  Jesus,  when  ex- 
piring upon  the  cross,  committed  his  spirit  into  the  hands  of  the  Fa- 
ther. This  expiring  disciple  also  implores  forgiveness  for  his  mur- 
derers. Of  whom  does  he  implore  it  ?  Of  the  same  Lord  Jesus. 
Can  a  departing  spirit  be  intrusted  to  any  being,  and  the  forgiveness 
of  sin  be  expected  of  him,  who  has  not  omnipotence  and  supreme 
authority  ?  And  can  a  dying  martyr,  with  his  eyes  fixed  on  the  very 
vision  of  God,  and  his  soul  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  ask  and  pray 
amiss  ? 

2  Cor.  12:  8,  9,  "  For  this  thing  I  besought  the  Lord  thrice,  that 
it  might  depart  from  me.  And  he  said  unto  me,  My  grace  is  suf- 
ficient for  thee  ;  for  my  strength  is  made  perfect  in  weakness. 
Most  gladly  therefore  will  I  rather  glory  in  my  infirmities,  that  the 
power  of  Christ  may  rest  upon  me." 

The  Lord  whom  Paul  here  besought,  is  plainly  Christ ;  for  this 
same  Lord  in  answer  to  the  apostle's  supplication,  says,  ^'  My  grace 
is  sufficient  for  thee  ;  for  my  sireugxh  [iq  dvva^ig  fiov)  h  perfected 
in  weakness."  Then  the  apostle  immediately  subjoins,  "  Most 
gladly  then  would  I  rejoice  in  my  infirmities,  that  the  strength  of 
CHRIST  [r]  dvvafxig  Xgioxov)  may  rest  upon  me."  A  clearer  case 
that  Christ  was  the  object  of  the  apostle's  repeated  prayer,  cannot 
well  be  presented. 

1  Thess.  3:  11,  12,  "Now,  God  himself,  and  our  Father,  and 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  direct  our  way  unto  you.  And  the  Lord 
make  you  to  increase  and  abound  in  love  one  toward  another,  and 
toward  all  men,  even  as  we  do  toward  you." 

Can  any  distinction  be  here  made,  between  the  rank  of  those  who 
are  addressed  by  the  apostle  ?  And  does  not  the  twelfth  verse  very 
plainly  show,  that  the  supplication  of  the  apostle  is  specially  directed 
to  the  Lord,  i.  e.  to  Christ  ? 

2  Thess.  2:  16,  17,  '*  Now,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  and 

35 


274  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  H. 

God  even  our  Father,  which  hath  loved  us,  and  hath  given  us  ever- 
lasting consolation,  and  good  hope  through  grace,  comfort  your 
hearts  and  establish  you  in  every  good  word  and  work." 

Here  the  order  of  the  persons  to  whom  supplication  is  made,  is 
the  reverse  of  that  in  the  last  instance  quoted  ;  which  shows  that 
nothing  depends  on  the  order^  but  that  it  was  a  matter  of  indiffer- 
ence with  the  apostle,  which  was  placed  first ;  the  supplication  be- 
ing equally  addressed  to  the  Father  and  to  Christ. 

Rom.  1:7,"  To  all  that  be  in  Rome,  beloved  of  God ;  called  to 
be  saints  ;  grace  to  you,  and  peace,  from  God  our  Father,  and  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

Here  the  same  blessings  are  solicited  and  expected,  from  Christ 
and  the  Father.  See  the  same  formula  repeated,  1  Cor.  1:  3.  2 
Cor.  1:  2. 

Acts  1:  24,  "And  they  prayed,  and  said,  Thou,  Lord,  which 
knowest  the  hearts  of  all  men,  shew  whether  of  these  two  thou  hast 
chosen." 

That  Lord  here  means  the  Lord  Jesus,  seems  evident  from  v. 
21  and  22.  It  is  the  usual  appellation,  moreover,  which  the  book 
of  Acts  gives  to  the  Saviour.     (See  above  p.  408  bot.) 

2  Tim.  4:  14,  "  The  Lord  reward  him  according  to  his  works  1" 
Again,  v.  17  and  18  ;  "  Notwithstanding,  the  Lord  stood  with  me, 
and  strengthened  me ;  that  by  me  the  preaching  might  be  fully 
known,  and  that  all  the  gentiles  might  hear ;  and  I  was  delivered 
out  of  the  mouth  of  the  lion.  And  the  Lord  shall  deliver  me  from 
every  evil  work,  and  will  preserve  me  unto  his  heavenly  kingdom : 
to  whom  be  glory  forever  and  ever.  Amen."  (Compare  ch.  3: 11). 
Usage  hardly  admits  a  doubt  here,  that  Lord  means  Christ. 

Nor  can  I  separate  from  religious  invocation,  trust,  and  confi- 
dence, such  expressions  as  these,  (Acts  3:  1),  "  Then  Peter  said. 
Silver  and  gold  have  I  none ;  but  such  as  I  have  give  I  thee  : 
In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Nazareth,  rise  up  and  walk."  Nor 
can  I  see  how  the  solemn  adjuration  by  Christ  {iv  XgiaiM),  which 
the  apostle  uses,  in  Rom.  9:  1,  and  1  Tim.  2:  7,  can  be  separated 
from  religious  invocation,  or  appeal. 

We  must  add  to  all  these  instances  of  worship,  the  fact  that 
Christians  were  so  habituated  to  address  their  supplications  to  Christ, 
that  "  They  who  invoke  Christ,"  became,  it  would  seem,  a  kind  of 
proper  name,  by  which  they  were  in  primitive  times  designated  as 
Christians. 

Thus  Paul  (1  Cor.  1:  2)  addresses  himself  to  all  who  invoice  the 
name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  in  every  place.  That  the  verb 
inixaXio)  is  an  appropriate  one  to  designate  the  act  of  prayer,  will 
not  be  questioned.     The  literal  translation  of  it  is  to  invoke.     The 


^  42. J  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST WORSHIP.  275 

simple  meaning  of  the  passage  is,  "  I  address  myself  to  all  Chris- 
tians." But  instead  of  using  the  name  Christians  directly,  the 
apostle  uses  a  periphrasis,  and  says  to  all  the  invoTcers  of  Christy  i. 
e.  to  those  who  pray  to  him ;  meaning  the  same  as  dyloig,  Klrjxolgy 
etc.  in  the  context.  He  has  signified,  too,  that  the  practice  of  in- 
voking Christ,  was  not  confined  to  Corinth.  He  addresses  "  those 
who  pray  to  Christ,  in  every  'place^^  (h  navtl  totico). 

Exactly  in  the  same  manner,  does  Ananias  describe  Christians, 
when  the  Lord  Jesus  bade  him  go  to  instruct  and  comfort  Saul 
(Acts  9:  13,  14) ;  "Lord,"  said  he,  "  I  have  heard  of  many  con- 
cerning this  man,  what  things  he  has  done  (to??  ayioig  gov)  to  thy 
saints  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  even  now,  he  has  a  commission  from  the 
high  priest,  to  bind  all  {tovg  imxakovf^tvoug  to  ovofia  oov)  those 
who  invoke  thy  name,"  i.  e.  Christians.  See  the  same  thing  re- 
peated, V.  21. 

The  very  heathen  in  the  primitive  age  of  Christianity,  little  as 
they  knew  about  Christians,  discovered  that  they  made  Christ  an 
object  of  worship.^ 

Did  not  the  Saviour  give  his  disciples  a  general  precept  and  en- 
couragement, to  make  him  the  object  of  prayer?  John  14:  13,  14, 
"  If  ye  shall  ask  any  thing  in  my  name,"  i.  e.  as  my  disciples,  on 
my  account,  said  he  to  the  apostles,  "  I  will  accomplish  it,"  (iyco 
notrjGO}).  They  appear  to  me  to  have  understood  this,  as  directing 
that  he  should  be  regarded  by  them  as  the  special  object  of  prayer. 
Hence,  instead  of  finding  few  or  no  examples  of  prayer  to  Christ,  in 
the  history  of  the  primitive  Christians  as  exhibited  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, 1  find  more  of  this  nature  than  of  any  other. 

When  I  have  contemplated  the  precepts,  which  encourage  pray- 
er to  Christ  and  the  worship  of  him,  both  by  the  inhabitants  of  the 
heavenly  world,  and  by  the  churches  on  earth ;  I  then  compare 
these  things  with  the  exclusive  worship  and  trust  which  Jehovah 
claims  to  himself. — Is.  45:  22,  23,  "  Look  unto  me  and  be  ye  sav- 
ed, all  the  ends  of  the  earth ;  for  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else. 
I  have  sworn  by  myself,  the  word  has  gone  out  of  my  mouth  in 
righteousness,  and  shall  not  return,  That  unto  me  every  knee  shall 
bow,  every  tongue  shall  swear."  Is.  42:  8,  "  I  am  the  Lord  ;  that 
is  my  name  ;  and  my  glory  will  I  not  give  to  another,  neither  my 
praise  to  graven  images."  Jer.  17:  5 — 7,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
Cursed  be  the  man  that  trusteth  in  man,  and  maketh  flesh  his  arm, 
and  whose  heart  departeth  from  the  Lord.  For,  he  shall  be  like 
the  heath  in  the  desert,  and  shall  not  see  when  good  cometh ;  but 
shall  inhabit  parched  places  in  the  wilderness,  in  a  salt  land  and  not 
inhabited.     Blessed  is  the  man  that  trusteth  in  the  Lord,  and  whose 

[1  See  the  quotations  from  Pliny  and  Eusebius,  on  p.  270  of  this  work.    S.J 


276  THE  TRINITY.  [bk.  II. 

hope  the  Lord  is."  Matt.  4:  10,  "  Then  saith  Jesus  unto  him, 
Get  thee  hence,  Satan  ;  for  it  is  written,  Thou  shalt  worship  the 
Lord  thy  God,  and  him  only  shah  thou  serve." 

I  am  ready  now  to  ask,  whether  I  can  avoid  coming  to  the  con- 
clusion, either  that  Christ  is  truly  divine,  in  as  much  as  he  is  so  often 
represented  as  the  object  of  worship  ;  or  that  the  sacred  writers  have 
mistaken  this  great  point,  and  led  us  to  that  which  must  be  consid- 
ered as  idolatry.  And  yet  the  worship  of  Christ  is  placed,  as  it 
would  seem,  in  opposition  to  that  of  idols,  1  Cor.  8:  4 — 6.  That 
Christianity  utterly  and  forever  renounces  all  idolatry — all  polythe- 
ism, in  a  word,  every  thing  inconsistent  with  the  worship  of  one  on- 
ly living  and  true  God  ;  is  a  point  so  plain  and  so  universally  con- 
ceded, that  I  shall  not  dwell  for  a  moment  upon  it. 

Were  it  not  that  1  fear  becoming  tedious,  by  detailing  my  reasons 
for  believing  in  the  divine  nature  of  Christ,  I  should  add  a  great 
number  of  texts,  which  require  us  with  all  the  heart  to  love  him  ; 
to  obey  him  ;  to  confide  in  him ;  and  to  commit  ourselves  to  him  ; 
in  such  a  manner  as  I  can  never  persuade  myself  to  do,  with  respect 
to  any  being,  who  is  not  God.  The  ^qw  Testament  tells  me  that 
my  consolation,  my  privilege — my  happiness,  must  be  derived  from 
trusting  in  Christ.  But  can  I  trust  myself  to  a  finite  being,  when 
I  have  an  infinite^  almighty ^  all-sufficient  GOD,  to  whom  I  may 
go  ?  Shall  I  be  satisfied  with  a  mite,  when  I  can  have  the  mines  of 
Peru?] 

III.  9.      Creation  is  ascribed  to  Christ. 

I.  John  1:  3,  10,  napTU  dt  avtov  fyei/eio — o  xoofiog  di  aviov 
tyiviio  all  things  were  made  by  him — the  world  was  made  by  him, 

A  version  of  these  passages  maintained  by  Socinians,  is  this: 
"  Every  thing  was  done  by  Christ  which  belongs  to  the  Gospel — 
the  world  was  reformed  by  him."  In  reference  to  this  first  passage, 
it  is  objected,  that  the  apostle  gives  no  sanction  for  the  addition, 
"  which  belongs  to  the  Gospel :"  in  regard  to  the  second,  it  is  to 
be  remarked,  that  no  evidence  can  be  adduced  to  prove  that  yevia- 
-^ac  can  signify  ^o  ma]{e  anew  or  reform.  Moreover,  a  different  sig- 
nification of  this  word  is  adopted  in  verse  3.  Again,  in  v.  10,  it  is 
said,  0  xoGfAog  avioi/  ovx  eyixx)  the  world  knew  him  not ;  and  yet  it 
is  pretended,  that  the  sense  of  the  other  clause  of  the  same  verse  is, 
that  0  aoofiog  the  world  was  reformed  by  him  !  A  different  modifi- 
cation of  this  exposition  is  this  :  a  part  of  the  world  [men]  was  spir- 
itually improved  by  the  light,  another  part  knew  it  not.  But,  agree- 
ably to  the  New  Testament,  the  word  zoofiog,  in  its  synecdochi- 
cal  sense,  always  denotes  the  unreformed  part  of  mankind.     Be- 


<^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST CREATION.  277 


sides,  the  parallelism  of  v.  10  and  11,  seems  to  forbid  this  exposi- 
tion.^ 

Another  exposition  of  v.  3,  urged  by  the  Socinians,  is  this  :  "  Ev- 
ery thing  was  created  for  him,  on  his  account.'^  But  did  [with  a 
genitive  case]  is  not  clearly  proved  to  signify  on  account  of  or  for 
the  sake  of;  and  the  following  words,  /w^f?  aviov  tyivero  ovdi  tv 
without  him  was  nothing  made  ;  evidently  refer  to  the  active  cause, 
and  confirm  the  ordinary  signification  of  dva^  by.^ 

II.  Col.  1:  16,  17,  Iv  (xviM  iytiiGd^t]  ra  nccvzoc — icc  navra  di  ctu- 
zov  IxTiarai — tcc  navta  Iv  avxia  avvioii^ns  by  him  were  all  things 
created — all  things  were  created  by  him — all  things  are  sustained 
by  him. 

On  this  passage,  the  reader  may  consult  Lang,  On  the  profitable 
use  of  Teller's  Lexicon.*^  Flatt's  Commentatio  de  deitate  Christi 
(^  9),     Oertel's  Christology  f  and  Ewald,  On  the  dignity  of  Jesus. ^ 

The  principal  arguments  against  the  interpretation  of  those  who 
make  mi^fw  to  signify  a  moral  creation  [a  reformation],  or  merely 
a  great  change  wrought  by  Christ ;  are  the  following  : 

1.  Kti^hv  alone,  and  without  any  addition,  does  not,  in  a  single 
other  passage,  signify  either  a  moral  reformation,  or  in  general,  a 
great  change.^ 

2.  Philological  proof,  that  the  expressions  y^  and  ovgavog,  ogaroi 
and  doQatu,  can  denote  Jews  and  Gentiles,  it  is  utterly  impossible 
to  adduce.  In  the  Miscellaneous  Dissertations  on  important  sub- 
jects of  theological  learning,'^  Justi  would  defend  this  meaning  in 
the  following  manner :  "  The  Jews  are  called  ra  iv  rolg  ovgcxvo7g 
(the  things  in  the  heavens),  because  they  were  governed  by  divine 
laws,  and  were  citizens  of  a  theocratical  nation  {(^ccadila  twv  ovga- 
v(op);  and  ogazd  (things  seen),  because  their  worship  of  God  con- 
tained many  external,  visible  ceremonies.  The  gentiles  on  the  con- 
trary, are  denominated  td  inl  lijg  yrjg  (the  things  on  earth),  because 
they  were  governed  by  human  laws  ;  and  dogaza  (things  invisible), 
because  they  were  to  worship  God  spiritually"  (John  4:  24).  See 
Nosselt's  refutation  of  this  exposition,  in  his  Exercitt.  ad  Sanct. 
Scriptt.  interpretationem.^  Another  interpretation  proposed  by  Jus- 
ti, is,  that  the  words  r«  h  zolg  ovgavolg—dogaca,  denote  all  man- 

1  See  SUskind,  on  the  recent  Expositions  of  John  1;  1 — 14,  in  his  Magazine, 
No.  10,  p.  :i2  etc. 

2  On  the  Socinian  Expositions  of  John  1:  3, 10,  see  Bengel's  Histnrico-analyti- 
cal  exposition  of  the  Socinian  doctrinal  system  ;  in  the  Tab.  Mag.  No.  15.  p.  156 
etc.  159  etc. 

3  Pt.  III.  p.  52  etc.  4  p.  649,  §  33,  Note  2.  5  p.  61— 67. 

C  See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  434.     Schott's  Epitome 
theol.  Christ,  dogmatic,  p.  106. 
7  2d  Collection,  p.  200  etc.  Halle  1798.  8  p.  205  etc.  Halle  1803. 


278  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

kind  (the  whole  world,  every  creature,  in  the  popular  sense).  A- 
gainst  this,  bears  the  remark  of  Keil :  "  The  generic  idea  (the  whole) 
can  be  expressed  per  fAegiafiov,  only  by  the  enumeration  of  such 
species  (parts)  as  are  actually  comprehended  under  the  generic  idea 
(or  the  whole)." 

3.  If  by  ovgavog  and  dogatu,  we  understand  citizens  of  heaven, 
or  the  angels  ;  then  no  moral  reformation  can  be  predicated  of  them. 
Equally  inadmissible  is  the  following  exposition,  given  in  Henke's 
Magaz. :  ''  Every  thing  that  belongs  to  his  church,  in  heaven  and 
on  earth,  is  formed  anew  by  Christ ;  as  well  those  members 
which  are  known  to  us,  as  those  which  are  not  {dogaral),  all  who 
are  morally  reformed,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  powerful  kings 
and  princes  and  lords  (?)"  Nosselt,  in  his  Programma  de  una  Dei 
in  coelis  terrisque  familia,^  understands  the  passage  Col.  1:  16,  as 
referring  to  the  formation  of  a  church  consisting  of  citizens  of  earth 
and  heaven.  But  this  explanation  also,  is  liable  to  the  objection,, 
that  this  sense  of  Kxl^tiv  is  without  proof;  see  1  sup.  And  it  is 
evinced,  in  the  Tiibing.  gelehrt.  Anzeig.^  that  we  are  by  no  means 
required  to  understand  here  a  moral  or  spiritual  creation,  by  the 
preceding  or  succeeding  context ;  and  yet  both  are  appealed  to  by 
JVosselt,  Lofler,  and  Stoltz. 

In  1  Cor.  8:  6,  also,  Christ  is  represented  as  Creator  and  Lord 
of  the  world. 

III.  Heb.  1: 10,2,  3, dC  ov  rovg aiMvag  tnoii^aiv — q^igwv  tdndvTcc 
Tfo  gi^fiait  Ttjg  dvpdfiscog  amov  by  whom  he  made  the  world — sup- 
(porting  all  things  by  his  powerful  word. 

On  this  passage,  the  reader  may  consult  the  works  of  Lang,  Flatt, 
and  Ewald.  In  these  works,  the  exposition  of  this  passage,  which 
makes  Christ  the  Supreme  Creator  of  the  world,  in  opposition  to 
those  interpreters  who  make  the  word  aicHveg  signify  "  times"  (new 
times — times  of  the  Messiah — oeconomiae  divinae,)  or  did  to  refer 
only  to  the  instrumental  cause ;  is  supported  by  the  following  ar- 
guments and  observations  : 

1.  It  is  evident  from  chap.  11:3,  that  aimvtg  does  signify  worlds 
or  world.  Comp.  <5>  34.  Illust.  1 . 

2.  The  words  dC  ov  aiwvag  inolrjaev  cannot  justify  any  of  the  fol- 
lowing versions  :  "  By  him  he  created  new  times ;"  or,  "  He  suffered 
new  epochs  to  arise,  through  him  ;"  or,  "  By  him,  he  created  anew 
[reformed]  the  world  of  mankind,  the  human  family."  The  ex- 
planation, "  By  whom  God  determined  certain  periods  of  time  [the 
time  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  preceding  period,"]  would  either  ex- 
press too  insignificant  an  idea,  and  one,  moreover  already  included 

1  Exercitt.  ad  Sanct.  Scriptt.  interpretationem,  p.  198 — 210. 

2  For  1805,  No.  10.  p.  77. 


^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST DEITY.  279 

in  the  words  In  la^cixov  rmv  ijfif^wv  (v.  1  ;)  or,  if  the  sense  is  this, 
"  He  so  governed  the  course  of  events  in  the  world,  that  the  epochs 
of  the  world  coincide  with  the  advent  of  the  Messiah  ;"  then  the 
I  idea  is  foreign  from  the  terms  di  ov  tovg  aiwvug  inolriae. 

3.  It  is  an  undeniable  fact,  that  the  10th  verse  of  this  chapter 
does  ascribe  the  creation  of  the  world,  to  Christ. 

4.  That  dia  does  not  denote  merely  an  instrumental  cause,  is 
evident  from  those  passages  in  which  it  is  also  said  of  the  Father, 
**  All  things  were  created  by  him  (dt  amov)  Heb.  2:  10.  Rom.  11: 
36  ;  as  also  from  the  general  fact,  that  dia  and  ex  are  used  inter- 
changeably for  each  other  ;  see  <§>  33.  Illust.  1. 

But  as  Heb.  1:1,2  relates  to  the  person  through  whom  God  in- 
structed \xs{hvlM  iXaXrjaev  ni^lv,)  namely,  the  incarnate  Logos; 
the  words  dv  ov  xai  zovg  alcavag  inoh^aev  must  be  understood  thus  : 
"  God  created  the  world  by  the  same  person,  through  whom  he  has 
spoken  to  us,  in  as  much  as  this  person  is  God  himself,  and  one  with 
the  Father  ;  i.  e.  he  created  the  world  by  himself."  In  like  man- 
ner, in  Hos.  1:  7,  it  is  said,  "  I  (Jehovah)  will  save  them  through 
[or  by]  Jehovah."^ 

III.  10.   The  sense  in  which  Christ  is  called  God ;  an  explanation 
of  passages  which  seem  to  militate  against  his  supreme  divinity. 

He  is  called  God  in  such  a  sense,  that  it  can  be  said  of  him,  that 
he  possesses  power  to  do  whatever  God  can  do ;  or,  such,  that  the 
perfections  of  the  divine  nature  can  be  predicated  of  him.  This  is 
evinced  by  various  passages  : 

Phil.  2:  6,  iV  f^ogq^rj  Oeov  vndgxojv — loa  -d^ido  ehctt  being  in  the 
condition  of  God,  (i.  e.  in  the  divine  state  or  nature) — to  be  equal 
with  God.  Martini  makes  a  distinction  between  the  phrases  iif 
fiOQCfri  &iov  ihaVj  and  lau  {^eS  eii/cci,  and  explains  the  passage  thus  : 
Although  Christ  possessed  a  high  degree  of  similarity  to  God,  he 
was  not  solicitously  desirous  of  being  equal  with  God  ;"  i.  e.  he  was 
far  from  arrogating  to  himself  equality  with  God,  or  requiring  divine 
worship.  But  neither  usage  nor  the  context  favour  this  interpreta- 
1  tion,  more  than  they  do  several  others,  which  agreeably  to  this 
Section  better  accord  with  the  declarations  of  Jesus  and  the  doctrin- 
al system  of  the  apostle  Paul.  Comp.  Storr's  Opusc.  Academ.  Vol. 
I.  p.  322— 324. 

Col.  2:  9,  iv  aviM  xaTOixeT  nap  to  nk^gco/xa  Ttjg  {f^eiortjiog  in 
him  dwelt  the  entire  fulness  of  the  deity  ;  i.  e.  all  the  attributes  of 
the  divine  nature.  1:  19.  John  16:  15,  navza  oaoc  e^^t  d  nairlg^  i^a 
iar*  all  things  which  the  father  hath,  are  mine.  5:  19 — 21,  a  av  d 

'  See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  457. 


280  THE  TRINITY.  [bK. 


II. 


naxriQ  noirj  lavra  xai  o  vlog  o/noicog  nocu  whatsoever  things  the 
Father  doth,  all  these  things  doth  the  Son  hkewise.  These  words 
contain  the  reply  of  Jesus,  to  the  accusation  of  the  Jews  immediate- 
ly preceding :  "  That  he  made  himself  equal  with  God,"  v.  18. 
In  the  work  just  referred  to  in  the  margin,  several  other  declarations 
of  Christ  are  adduced  (John  12:  45.  14:  7,  9,  6  icogaxojg  ifii,  /o>pax« 
Tov  Tiazf'ga,  compared  with  v.  10.  8:  19)  as  evidence  of  that  one- 
ness with  the  Father,  to  which  he  laid  claim.  And  this  remark  is 
subjoined  :  *'  If  these  expressions  merely  signify,  that  God  spake 
and  acted  through  him  ;  they  contain  no  more  than  every  prophet 
could  have  said  of  himself." 

Those  passages  of  Scripture  which  appear  to  militate  against 
Christ's  being  God,  in  this  sense,  (viz.  John  14:  28.  10:  35.  17:  3. 
1  Cor.  8:  6.  15:  28,)  are  all  explained  in  the  work  on  the  Object 
of  the  Gospel  and  epistles  of  John  ;  in  the  Dissert,  de  notione  regni 
coelestis  ;  and  in  Flatt's  Comment,  de  deitate  Christi. 

1.  John  14:  28,  6  naTi]Q  f4ov  ^fiC(ov  f^ov  iaztv  "The  Father  is 
happier  than  I — he  enjoys  a  happiness  and  glory  which  1  do  not 
enjoy  in  my  present  slate."  Compare  ui'i^oiv  with  bi5  Gen.  26:  13. 
It  is  evident  from  the  context,  that  Jesus  is  not  comparing  his  hu- 
man nature  with  the  divine  nature  of  the  Father ;  but  the  situation 
of  his  human  nature  at  that  time,  with  the  happiness  of  the  Father. 
The  connexion  of  ihe  words  oxv  6  naiTjg  f.iov — i'ar*  with  the  previ- 
ous clause  fi  i^yanari  fif,  appears  thus  to  be  more  natural  and  per- 
spicuous, than  in  the  explanation  of  Kuinol :  "  the  Father  will  do 
more  through  you,  for  the  dissemination  of  my  doctrines,  than  I 
effected  whilst  on  earth,  or  than  I  could  effect  by  a  longer  residence 
in  this  world."  And  the  reference  to  the  previous  clause,  seems 
almost  entirely  neglected  in  the  explanation  :  ''  God  can  protect 
you  better  than  my  visible  presence  could." — Moreover,  Jesus 
could  ascribe  to  his  person  in  general,  such  predicates  as  belonged 
properly  to  only  a  part  of  his  entire  person,  i.  e.  only  to  his  human 
or  to  his  divine  nature  ;  just  as  we  attribute  to  a  man  [the  whole 
man,]  properties  and  actions  which  belong  exclusively  to  either  his 
soul  or  his  body. 

2.  John  10:  35,  36.  fl  ixelvovg  due  d^eovg — 6  vlog  tov  &iov  elfit 
if  the  Scripture  called  them  gods,  to  whom  the  word  of  God  was 
addressed  ;  and  if  the   Scripture  is  incontrovertible  ;  do  ye  say  of 
him  whom  the  Father  hath  consecrated  and  sent  into  the  world, 
"  Thou  blasphemest,"  because  I  said  1  am  the  Son  of  God  ?  That 
Jesus  called  himself  Son  of  God,  in  a  far  higher  sense,  than  that  in 
which  the  Jewish  judges  are  so  called  (Ps.  82:  6,)  is  proved  by  the  \ 
words  oV  0  TtairiQ  iqyiaae  xai  anidietXev  sig  tov  xoofiov    "  whom  the   j 
Father  distinguished,   by   sending   him."     "  Besides,   Jesus   had 
previously  determined  the  sense  in  which  he  called  himself  vlog^tov 


1^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST DEITY.  281 


(v.  28,  30,)  and  he  was  distinctly  understood  by  his  opponents,  who 
charged  him  with  making  himself  God  [-^eov  atavTov  tiouIq.]  He 
also  repeated  the  explanation,  v.  38,  tv  ff-iol  d  naxrig,  v.ay(a  Iv  ai^rru 
the  Father  is  in  me,  and  1  in  him.  But  it  was  not  his  intention,  in 
that  place,  to  give  them  a  more  definite  explanation  of  the  nature  of 
bis  person. 

3.  John  17:  3,  amri  imiv  rj  ^co?J  »J  aluvtog,  'iva  ytvowxcDai  0£  top 
fiovov  dXrf^tvov  ^fov,  xaiov  dntatiikag  'Jijoovv  Xqcotov  this  is  life 
eternal,  that  they  might  know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus 
Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent.  Christ  styles  the  Father,  "  The  only 
true  God,"  not  in  opposition  to  himself,  but  in  opposition  to  the 
false  gods  of  the  heathen.  This  is  evinced  by  the  expression  ndaa 
cdg^  in  v.  2,  all  men,  Jews  or  Gentiles,  [over  whom  power  was 
given  to  the  Son  to  give  them  eteranl  life  ;]  and  by  the  glorification 
(v.  1)  of  the  Father  through  the  Son  [by  the  propagation  of  belief 
in  the  one  true  God,  by  means  of  Christianity.]  This  interpretation 
is  further  supported  by  the  fact,  that  we  have  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  in  this  text,  Christ  expressed  the  very  essence  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

4.  1  Cor.  8:  6,  But  we  acknowledge  only  one  God,  the  Father ; 
from  whom  are  all  things  (derived,)  and  we  in  him  [for  whose  glory 
we  also  exist ;]  and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  are  all  things 
[by  whom  all  things  were  created,]  and  we  by  him  [by  whom 
also  we  were  created.]  The  fact  that  the  Father  is  called  its  -(^sog 
one  God,  no  more  denies  the  divinity  [&st6Tr}g~\  of  Jesus,  than  the 
circumstance  that  Jesus  is  called  elg  avgiog  one  Lord  denies  the  do- 
minion [xvgwiijg]  of  the  Father.  But  that  avgiog  cannot,  in  this 
place,  signify  teacher,  as  Teller  contends  ;  is  evident  from  the  fact, 
that  in  the  5th  verse  {^soi  and  nvgioi  are  synonymous  ;  and  from  a 
comparison  of  the  two  predicates  it  ou  rd  ndvia  and  di  ov  id  ndvia 
in  V.  6,  the  former  of  which  is  attributed  to  the  deog  nazr^g,  and  the 
latter  to  avgcog'/tjaovg  Xgiorog  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Comp.  Illus- 
tration 9. 

5.  1  Cor.  15:  28,  orav  Si  vnoxuyri  avi(\)  (rw  Xgiaro})  rd  ndvia. 
1016  y.ul  aviog  6  vlog  vnOTayria^Tuv  ico  vnoid^avji  avita  rd  ndvra 
but  when  he  shall  have  subjected  all  things  unto  him  (Christ,)  then 
shall  the  Son  himself  also  be  subject  to  him  who  made  all  things 
subject  to  him.  The  following  explanation  of  this  passage,  is  given 
in  the  Dissertation  de  Notione  regni  coelestis  :  Moreover,  if  every 
thing  has  been  subjected  to  the  Son  (by  the  Father,)  then  the  Son 
himself  must  also  be  subject  to  him  (then  it  is  evident,  that  the  Son 
is  subject  to  him)  who  made  all  things  subject  unto  him."  "Oiav 
does  not  here  indicate  a  precise  time,  any  more  than  in  v.  27  ;  but 
it  signifies  if,  whereas.  See  Rom.  2:  14.  The  future  vnoTaynoiTai 
indicates  an  inference  made  :  as  if  it  were  written  dnXov  ott,  (comp. 

36 


282  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II 

V.  27)  xal  avtog  6  vldg  vnoraaaezai.  The  same  sense  is  expressed 
by  the  future  in  Rom.  6:  5.  2:  26.  In  like  manner,  To'r^does  not 
here  express  succession  of  time  ;  but  is  either  the  sign  of  the  apodo- 
sis  (comp.  LXX,  Ps.  1 19:  91.  Prov.  2:  5,)  or  a  pleonasm  (LXX, 
Psalm  69:  5,)  or  it  is  equivalent  to  therefore.  (Comp.  Jer.  22:  15, 
the  Heb.  lii^-)  In  the  opinion  of  Grotius  and  others,  the  passage  1 
Cor.  15:  24 — 28,  refers  to  what  is  termed  the  Mediatorial  reign  of 
Jesus,  regimen  oeconomicum. 

III.  1 1 .     Explanation  of  passages  in  which  Christ  is  called  God. 

1.  John  1:  ly{fe6grjif  6  loyog  the  Word  was  God.  On  this  pas- 
sage and  onward  to  v.  14,  the  reader  may  consult  the  work  on  the 
Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  Flatt  de  Deitate  Christi,  and  Siiskind 
on  the  late  explanations  of  John  1:  1 — 14.  The  principal  remarks 
contained  in  these  several  works,  relative  to  this  subject,  are  the 
following.  1.  The  conjecture,  that  the  introduction,  v.  1 — 5  or  1 
— 18,  may  not  be  genuine,  is  totally  unfounded.  Neither  is  there 
the  semblance  of  evidence,  in  support  of  the  violent  change  of  the 
text  by  Crellius,  who  would  read  :  •&  {  o  v  ri  v  6  A  o  y  o  g,  or  of 
Bardt,  who  would  read :  deog  riv  x  a  l  6  Xoyog.  2.  The  general 
sense  of  the  whole  passage  v.  1 — 18,  has  been  stated  thus:  "  Wis- 
dom and  understanding,  or  power  (the  Word,)  were  present  in  God, 
at  the  creation  of  the  world — by  his  wisdom  or  power,  he  created 
all  things ; — and  this  wisdom  or  power  was  visibly  manifested  in 
Jesus."  In  Paulus'  Memorabilia,  Vol.  VIII.  No.  3,  to  support  the 
explanation,  "  The  deity  as  teaching  by  words  and  works,"  it  is 
urged,  that  John,  in  v.  1 — 3,  in  refuting  the  error  of  the  Jewish 
literati,  who  regarded  the  personified  Word  of  God,  or  the  creative 
word,  as  something  separate  from  God,  as  an  intermediate  being. — 
But,  it  may  be  replied  :  (a)  it  is  not  natural,  by  the  words  o  Xoyog 
cuf)^  iyevfTO  the  word  became  flesh,  to  understand  merely  the  mani- 
festation of  the  divine  power  or  whtlom,  through  Christ. — (b)  ^yog 
is  the  same  subject  which  in  v.  5  is  called  to  q^ojg,  and  this  subject 
is  manifestly  described,  in  v.  9 — 12,  as  a  concrete. — (c)  If  all  the 
propositions,  v.  1 — 3,  expressed  nothing'more  than,  "God  has  cre- 
ated all  things  by  his  wisdom  or  power,"  the  evangelist  would  be 
guilty  of  intolerable  garrulity.  And  where  would  be  the  necessity 
of  reiterating  the  assurance,  v.  1,  2,  "  the  power  or  wisdom  of  God 
was  with  God,"  oloyog  riv  n^ogzov  ■Qiovl 

The  hypothesis,  that  "  the  notion  of  a  real  union  of  an  emanated 
divine  power  with  Jesus,  was  either  taught  by  John  in  accommoda- 
tion to  the  current  opinions  of  those  days,  or  was  proposed  by  him 
as  his  personal  opinion ;"  is  refuted  in  the  dissertation  of  Siiskind, 
to  which  allusion  has  been  made,  (p.  51 — 75,)  where  it  is  shewn, 
that  the  existence  of  such  opinions  in  that  age  cannot  be  proved 
from  history. 


§  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST DEITY.  283 


3.  Seog,  without  the  article  in  the  sentence  d^fog  tjt^  6  kdyog, 
cannot  be  understood  in  a  lower  sense,  than  6  d^eog,  with  the  article. 
For, — (a)  '&i6g,  without  any  addition,  in  other  passages  of  the  New 
Testament,  never  has  any  other  signification,  than  that  of  the  only 
true  God.  And  that  article  makes  no  difference,  appears  from  v.  6 
{napd{)eou,)\3,  18,  2  Cor.  1:  21.  5:  5.— (b)  Not  only  is  the  loyog 
&i6g  represented  as  existing  before  the  origin  of  all  things  (v.  1,  2,) 
but  to  him  is  attributed  the  creation  of  all  things  (v.  3  ;)  an  act 
which  can  belong  only  to  the  supreme  God. 

Paulas,  in  his  commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  John,  has  given  the 
most  full  developement  of  that  explanation  of  Ofog  r,v  6  loyog^ 
which  takes  &f6g  in  an  inferior  sense ;  and  by  koyog  understands  an 
intelligent  being  exterior  to  God,  and  inferior  to  him  ;  a  being  who, 
according  to  the  idea  of  the  Alexandrian  Jew^s,  proceeded  from  God, 
in  a  peculiar  manner,  before  the  world  existed  ;  w^ho  was  most  inti- 
mately connected  with  God,  and  was  far  superior  to  all  other  spirits. 
This  explanation  rests  chiefly  on  the  coincidence  of  the  ideas  of 
John  with  those  of  Philo  his  contemporary,  relative  to  his  Logos. — 
In  the  well  known  passage  of  his  work  "  de  Somniis,"  Philo  makes 
a  difference  between  d-sog  with  the  article,  and  the  same  w^ord  with- 
out it ;  and  applies  the  name  -Oeog  without  an  article,  to  the  Xoyog. 
But,  independently  of  the  fact,  that  it  is  doubtful  w^hether  John  was 
acquainted  with  the  ideas  of  Philo,  or  had  reason  to  suppose  an  ac- 
quaintance with  them  in  his  hearers  ;  to  derive  from  Philo  an  ex- 
planation of  the  words  {^eog  riv  d  loyog,  seems  not  very  consistent, 
from  the  circumstance,  that  in  the  very  passage  here  alluded  to, 
Philo  himself  twice  notices  the  difficulty  and  novelty  of  transferring 
the  name  God  to  a  being  exterior  to  the  supreme  deity.  In  one 
place  he  says,  the  Logos  (without  the  article)  can  be  called  God, 
only  *V  lAutaxgriGsi  [by  catachresis,  i.  e.  wresting  a  word  from  its 
native  signification.]  In  a  subsequent  passage, he  says,  "the  Scrip- 
tures are  not  very  particular  in  the  application  of  names  [they  are 
not  religiously  scrupulous,  ov  decGidacfiovojv  negl  tj?V  d^iGiv  tmv 
ovofAatcDv,]  when  they  apply  even  the  name  of  God  himself  (with- 
out the  article,)  to  the  eldest  Logos  of  God."  The  arguments  ad- 
duced in  the  Commentary  of  Kuinbl,  to  prove  that  even  in  the  time 
of  Christ,  there  prevailed  an  idea  among  the  Jews  in  Palestine,  that 
before  the  creation,  an  intelligence  emanated  immediately  from  the 
Deity,  which  was  to  appear  on  earth  in  the  person  of  the  Messiah  ; 
are  very  problematical  ;  and  are  derived  in  part  from  such  Jewish 
writings  as  either  were  certainly  written  since  that  time,  or  whose 
date  is  very  uncertain. 

4.  In  whatever  manner  we  explain  the  word  loyo^,  it  is  perfect- 
ly accordant  with  the  usage  of  the  Hebrew  and  the  Hebrew-Greek, 


284         X  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

to  designate  a  concrete  by  the  nanne  of  an  abstract.  If  we  look  for 
the  origin  of  the  nanne  Logos,  in  the  earher  work  of  John,  in  Rev. 
19:  13,  0  Xoyog  d^fov,  (where  Jesus  is  represented  as  a  conqueror  of 
the  enemies  of  his  doctrines  v.  19),  its  most  probable  signification 
is  :  "  Speaker  or  Messenger  of  God,  divine  Instructer ;"  just  as 
n'^Dn  prayer,  in  Ps.  109:  4  signifies.  One  who  prays.  Agreeably 
to  this  explanation,  the  name  Xoyog  (teacher)  was  a  name  of  Christ, 
which  John  used  in  his  Gospel,  on  supposition  that  it  would  be  ad- 
mitted by  those  against  whom  he  wrote,  namely,  the  Cerinthians 
and  disciples  of  John. 

Nor  must  the  late  explanation,  which  has  been  advocated  espe- 
cially by  Tittmann,  be  forgotten.  Agreeably  to  this,  o  Xoyog  is 
equivalent  to  o  Ifyo^evog,  6  ifj^of^tvog  he  that  was  promised,  the 
Messiah. 

5.  Another  explanation  of  the  words  'd^iog  ^v  6  Xoyog,  is  this  :^ 
God  was  the  speaker,  (o  Xoyog  instead  of  o  Xf'yiov,)  who  commis- 
sioned him,  and  made  known  his  will  through  him ;  for  he  spake 
nothing,  except  what  he  heard  of  God  when  he  was  with  him  (John 
8:  26).  The  following  objections  to  this  view,  are  contained  in  the 
Allgemeine  Bibliothek,^  and  in  the  Tiibing.  gel.  Anzeigen  :^  (a) 
Agreeably  to  this  explanation,  no  suitable  signification  could  be  at- 
tached to  the  2d  verse,  oviog  r}v  h  doy^r,  ngog  zov  {yeov  the  same 
was  in  the  beginning  with  God.  For,  if  we  translate  it,  "  God  was 
the  speaker,  this  Speaker  (who  was  God  himself)  was  in  the  begin- 
ning with  God  ;"  then  John  could  not  say,  that  Christ  as  spealcer, 
or  as  he  actually  taught  mankind,  was  with  God  in  the  beginning  of 
the  world.  For  in  the  beginning  of  the  world,  before  any  members 
of  the  human  family  existed,  he  could  not  have  existed  as  the  Teach- 
er of  men,  consequently  also  not  as  the  Speaker.  In  other  words, 
the  conclusion  of  the  first  verse,  in  connexion  with  the  second,  could 
not  signify,  "  It  was  properly  God,  who  spake  to  man  ;  because  he 
through  whom  God  spake,  was  in  the  beginning  of  the  world  sent 
by  God  [tji'  ngog  rov  -Oeov]  in  order  to  instruct  men."'* — By  oviog^ 
we  must  understand  the  person  of  the  speaker,  as  distinct  from  his 
office  of  teacher.  But  then  the  preceding  words  would  signify, 
*'  God  was  the  person  of  the  speaker."  And  this  is  the  very  idea 
which  this  interpretation  is  intended  to  avoid. — (b)  As  the  creation 
of  the  world  is  attributed  to  this  Logos,  in  v.  3  ;  no  being  distinct 
from  the  Deity,  can  possibly  be  intended. 

II.  John  20:  28,  6  nvgwg  fiov  xal  6  -deog  fAov  My  Lord  and  my 
God.  In  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John  (<§>  90), 
the  following  remarks  are   made  on  this  passage  :  "  The  exclama- 

1  Paulus'  Memorabilia.  Vol.  I.  No.  2.  p.  27—34.  2  Vol.  107.  p.  271. 

3  p.  323,  1702.  4  Memorabilia,  p.  32. 


^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST DEITY.  285 


tion  of  Thomas,  cannot  well  be  a  mere  expression  of  admiration. 
Independently  of  the  fact  that  this  phrase,  as  an  exclamation  of  ad- 
miration, cannot  be  proved  to  have  been  customary  among  the  Jews 
in  the  time  of  Jesus  ;  how  could  Jesus  (v.  29)  have  regarded  it  as 
a  proof  of  faith  ? — Nor  can  {^eog  be  wrested  from  its  proper  signifi- 
cation, and  made  to  signify  a  great  benefactor.  Tliis  the  usage  of 
the  language  forbids.  This  exclamation  of  Thomas  must,  there- 
fore, be  taken  in  its  literal  sense  ;  and  must  be  regarded  as  an  open 
declaration  of  his  belief,  that  there  existed  the  closest  possible  union 
between  Jesus  and  God  (John  14:  9,  10),  or  of  his  belief  in  the  di- 
vinity of  Christ.  And  had  this  exclamation  implied  what  is  errone- 
ous, Jesus  could  not  have  approved  it  (v.  29)  ;  but  on  the  other 
hand,  must  inevitably  have  censured  it.  Compare  the  passage  next 
cited. 

III.  1  John  5:  20,  ovzog  lailv  6  ctkTjdtvog  deog  this  is  the  true 
God.  In  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John  (p.  445), 
the  genuineness  of  the  reading  {^sog,  is  vindicated  against  the  objec- 
tions of  Semler,  taken  from  Hilary  de  Trinitate.  It  is  also  remark- 
ed (p.  231),  that  agreeably  to  Hebrew  usage,  the  demonstrative 
ovTog  is  placed  instead  of  the  relative  og,  as  in  Acts  8:  26.  10:  36. 
and  that  ouzog  is  more   naturally  referred  to  the  nearer  antecedent 

ftjoov  XgioiMr  than  to  the  more  remote  h  tm  dkfjd^ivw. 

IV.  Rom.  9:  5,  [cyf  at  naie^eg,  xal  i'§  wv  6  Xgiatog,  to  xaia 
<japxa,  0  atv  im  Tiavimv  &e6g  avloyi^xog  fig  lovg  alojvag.  ^ A^iriv, 
*'  Whose  are  the  Fathers ;  and  from  whom,  in  respect  to  the  flesh 
(his  human  nature),  Christ  (descended),  who  is  the  supreme  God, 
blessed  forever.   Amen."^] 

It  may  be  inquired  whether  the  doxology  in  this  passage,  suppos- 
ing it  to  begin  at  o  cup  int  navicov^  or  to  be  confined  to  the  words 
'&e6g  evXoytjtog  ilg  xovg  aiMvag,  refer  to  Christ,  or  to  God  the  Fa- 
ther. Even  in  the  Init.  Evang.  Johan.  restaur,  of  Artemonius  (or 
of  the  Socinian  writer,  Samuel  Crellius),  it  is  remarked,  that  a  dox- 
Qlogy  here  would  be  altogether  out  of  place,  as  Paul  (v.  1,  2)  is 
speaking  under  the  influence  of  the  deepest  grief,  and  lamenting  the 
loss  of  those  privileges  which  his  countrymen  might  have  enjoyed 
(v.  3 — 8,  31.  10:  19  etc.)  A  prayer  {dir,aig  10:  1),  and  not  a 
doxology,  would  have  been  adapted  to  the  state  of  mind  in  which 
the  apostle  wrote  these  words  (James  5:  13).  In  addition  to  this 
evidence,  the  followino-  arsfuments  are  adduced  in  the  works  above 
referred  to,  in  refutation  of  the  opinion  that  the  whole  passage  (o 
wv — aiojfag)  is  a  doxology,  addressed  to  God  the  Father:  (a)  The 
words  TO  xara  aagxcc,  which  refer  to  the  human  nature  of  Christ, 
require  a  corresponding  clause  relating  to  his  higher  nature  ;  as  for 

[1  See  Professor  Stuart's  Lett,  to  Wm.  E.  Channing,  p.  78,  3d.  ed.     S.] 


286  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  H. 

example,  in  eh.  1:  3.  comp.  Gal.  4:  29. — (b)  Such  a  sudden  tran- 
sition from  one  person  to  another,  from  Christ  to  God  the  Father, 
could  not  be  made  without  some  transitive  particle,  such  as  ^6  (in 
the  doxology  1  Tim.  1:  17).  The  remarks  made  by  Stoltz  against 
the  force  of  this  argument  appear  to  refer  only  to  the  statement  that 
dt  should  stand  between  xhog  and  eiXoyrixog.  At  least,  it  can  by 
no  means  be  asserted,  that  di  between  o  and  wV,  would  be  erron- 
eous.— (c)  For  the  very  reason,  that  the  particle  dt  is  not  found 
between  o  and  wV,  it  is  most  natural  to  refer  6  mv  to  XgidTog,  the 
subject  immediately  preceding.  The  participle  is  put  for  6?  ictt,. 
and  this  doxology  when  referred  to  Christ,  has  a  striking  similarity 
to  the  doxology  to  God  the  Father  (Rom.  1:25.)  And  Paul  would 
have  written  6?  ^arev  here  as  well  as  in  1:  25,  if  the  word  taviy 
understood  from  the  preceding  clause  xat  il — ffa(>xa,  had  not  been 
still  in  his  mind. 

The  difficulty  stated  by  Crellius,  attends  also  the  explanation  of 
Justi,  who  separates  the  words  o  wv  inl  naviMv  from  those  that  fol- 
low, Osog — aiojvag  ;  and  translates  the  passage  thus :  "  whose  an- 
cestors were  those  (celebrated)  fathers,  from  whom  even  in  regard 
to  his  mortal  body,  the  Messiah  is  descended,  who  is  exalted  above 
all  (the  fathers).  Blessed  be  God  (for  this)  to  eternity  !"  But  an- 
other difficulty  by  which  this  explanation  is  encumbered,  is  that  not 
only  Paul,  but  also  other  writers  always  in  their  doxologies,  place 
the  predicate  6t;Aoy?;roV  before  its  subject.  See  2  Cor.  1:3.  Ephes. 
1:  3.  1  Pet.  1:  3.  Luke  1:  68.  2  Mace.  15:  34.  Ps.  68:  36,  and 
others.  Trommius,  in  his  Concordance  to  the  LXX,  gives  a  num- 
ber of  examples,  under  the  word  evXoyriTog}  J.  F.  Flatt  re- 
marks that  fvXoyriTog  is  placed  first  not  only  in  those  instances  in 
which  the  doxology  begins  a  discourse,  but  also  when  it  is  found  in 
the  middle  or  at  the  conclusion  of  a  sentence.  The  only  passage 
in  the  LXX,  which  seems  to  be  an  exception  to  the  preceding  re- 
mark, is  Ps.  68:  19,  nvgcog  6  {f^eog  evXoyrjiog,  ivXoyt^iog  nvgiog  rifit- 
jgav  yaO"  7][.iigap,   and   on   this  Stoltz   lays   a  great  deal  of  stress. 

But  a  comparison  of  this  verse  with  the  Hebrew  text,  proves 
that  the  words  nvgtog  6  &f6g  (verse  19),  which  correspond  to  the 
Hebrew  DTiVni^  ~^  must  be  separated  from  evloyrjiog,  and  be  trans- 
lated thus:  "God  (is)  Lord  (Jehovah)."  Nor  is  the  case  altered, 
if,  with   Michaelis,  we  translate,  "  among  whom  God,  Jehovah  will 

[I  For  the  gratification  of  the  critical  reader  who  has  not  the  version  of  the 
LXX,  the  translator  has  selected  some  of  these  examples,  which  fully  evince  the 
truth  of  our  author's  remark  :  Gen.  9:  26.  evXoyyzog  xvQiog  6  ■&sug.  14:  20,  ttal  sv- 
XoyrjTog  6  d-eog  oyxfjujTog.  24:  27.  svXoyrjxogo  d'sog  tov  hvqiovuov.  Ex.  18:  10,  f  J-  , 
XoyrjTog  xvQiog  on,  i^eilaro  rdv  Xaov  avrov.  Ruth  4:  14,  svXoyr^Tog  nvQiog  og  ov  j 
TtariXvai:  aoi.   1  Sam.  25:  32,  evXoyrjTog  avQiog  o  d'tog^ loQat'jX.  2  Sam.  18:  28,  fvXo-  j 
yrjTog  xv^iog^o  d'eog  gov.  Dan.  3:  28,  xai  anevigid'T]  Na^ov/oSovoooQ  6  ^aatXsvg,  j 
xai  elnavj  EvXoytjtog  6  d'eog  xov  ^eSgdx,  Miodx,  ^^^edvayoi,  og  dTciatsiXs  rdv  ay^  < 
ysXov  avrov  x.T.X.     The  number  of  examples  adduced  by  Trommius,  amounts  to  i 
upward  of  thirty.     S.] 


,*§>  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST — DEITY.  28T 

dwell ;"  or  with  Schnurrer,  Dathe,  Knapp,  Rosenmiiller,  and  De 
iWette,  regard  t:■^^•'b^l,  n^  as  an  apostrophe  to  God,  "  there  thou  dwell- 
est,  God  Jehovah,"'" or""  that  thou  mayest  dwell  there."  In  the 
Hebrew,  ^^"1^  (blessed)  is  not  in  the  19th  but  in  the  20th  verse. 
But  if  an  appeal  be  made  to  the  fact,  that  the  LXX  repeat  the  word 
ivXoyy}i6?,  I  reply,  they  were  not  able  to  make  sense  of  the  words 
firrbn  r:;^,  and  therefore  supplied  fvkoyijiog,  ^l"!^?  out  of  the  begin- 
ning of  the  20th  verse.  But  that  they  did  this  as  a  kind  of  desper- 
ate measure,  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  they  nevertheless  put 
another  eiXoyeiog  in  the  beginning  of  the  20th  verse.  In  so  doing 
they  themselves  confess,  that  according  to  the  usage  of  the  language, 
fvkoyerog  ^^^i  belongs  to  the  subsequent  "^ilN  avgiog.  And  the 
only  reason  for  their  supplying  a  ^^"i':^  in  this  abitrary  manner,  was 
that  they  could  make  no  sense  out  of  the  latter  clause  of  the  19th 
verse.  It  is  however,  not  impossible,  (as  J.  F.  Flatt  remarks),  that 
some  transcriber  wrote  the  word  fvXoyt]i6g  twice,  through  inadver- 
tence. But,  be  this  as  it  may,  a  single  exception  to  a  rule  which 
is  established  by  such  a  vast  multitude  of  examples,  can  prove  noth- 
ling.  Their  translation  ought  properly  to  be  expressed  thus  :  *'Jehovah 
is  the  praiseworthy  God  ;  praise  be  to  God."  Nearly  all  the  ancient 
translators  were  entirely  at  a  loss  how  to  translate  this  passage,  and  ac- 
icordingly  they  allowed  themselves  different,  arbitrary  methods.  Justi 
does  indeed  remark,  that  "no  reasonable  cause  can  be  perceived,  why 
it  must  always  be  written  evXoyriTog  og  {>e6g  blessed  be  God!  and  why 
we  might  not  just  as  well  say,  diog  tvXoyrirog,  God  be  blessed  !  But 
we  should  always  be  very  cautious  about  reasoning  against  the  usage- 
ot  language ;  for  that  which  is  unnecessary  in  itself,  may  be  render- 
ed necessary  by  usage. ^  So  in  the  German  language  also  [and  ir» 
the  English],  we  can  say,  God  be  blessed  !  or,  blessed  be  God  \ 
praise  be  to  God  !  or,  to  God  be  praise ;  but  we  cannot,  instead  of 
thank  God  !  say,  God  thank  !^  In  the  same  manner,  the  usus  lo- 
quendi  of  the  Hebrew  may  have  rendered  it  necessary  in  doxologies, 
always  to  place  the  predicate  ^T'li  (Ps.  68:  29  etc.)  first.  But 
had  it  been  the  intention  of  Paul  here,  to  deviate  from  the  uniform 

[1  Every  schoolboy  can  repeat  the  lines  of  Horace,  in  which  this  principle, 
just  in  itself  and  acknowledged  by  every  critical  scholar,  has  been  transmitted 
inviolate  through  successive  centuries  : 

"  — si  volet  usus, 
duem  penes  arbitrium  est,  ct  jus  et  norma  loquendi."     S.] 

[2  There  are  no  authorized  phrases  in  the  English  language,  which  would  be  a 
literal  version  of  this  last  example  in  the  German.  The  translator  has  therefore 
selected  one  which  differs  but  little  from  the  sense  of  the  original,  whilst  it  per- 
fectly exemplifies  the  author's  remark  ;  and  which,  in  return,  it  may  be  observ- 
ed, is  equally  incapable  of  being  rendered  literally  into  the  German.     S.] 


288  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II, 

custom  of  Hebrew  writers,^  for  the  purpose  of  laying  peculiar  stress^ 
on  the  name  of  God  ;  then  he  ought  to  have  put  ioil  or  ur]  between 
^(6g  and  fvkoyrjTog,  as  the  LXX  have  done  (Ps.  119:  12.  Dan.  3: 
26),  to  prevent  evXoyi]T6g  from  being  regarded  as  a  mere  epithet, 
and  from  being  connected,  together  with  ifeog,  with  what  precedes 
both.3  As  this  was  not  done,  I  cannot  regard  the  conclusion  of  the 
verse,  fvXoytjTog — atojvag,  as  a  doxology  to  God  the  Father ;  which, 
moreover,  as  has  been  already  remarked,  would  here  be  out  of  place. 
The  words  which  precede,  o  ojv  inl  ndviwp,  will  admit  of  several 
explanations.  They  may  signify,  "  Christ  who  is  over  all  things 
(Eph.  4:  6.  comp.  1:  21,  and  Acts  10:  36,  'Jnoovg  Xgioiog  laxi 
Tiuvrmv  lavQiog)^  as  the  adorable  God ;"  i.  e.  "  who  was  appointed 
Lord  over  all  things,  because  he  is  himself  the  adorable  God."^ 
Or,  the  plan  of  Justi  may  be  adopted,  and  naiigoiv  be  supplied  to 
navTojv.  The  sense  would  then  be  this  :  *•  He  is  exalted  above  the 
most  illustrious  fathers  [ancestors]  of  the  Jews,  as  the  adorable  God.'* 
In  like  manner,  Jesus  adduces  his  preexistence  and  his  divine  nature 
{nglv  iy(6  iifit,  v.  58),  as  evidence  of  the  truth  of  his  assertion,  that 
he  is  greater  than  Abraham,  John  8:  50.  comp.  v.  53,  /uf/^wr.  Ei- 
ther of  these  explanations  may  be  adopted,  provided  it  can  be  vin- 
dicated against  the  grammatical  difSculty  urged  by  Justi  (sup.  cit.) 
He  says,  "  If  Paul  had  intended,  by  the  phrases  i'§.  mv  6  Xgiaiog 
TO  Hard  adgxa  and  6  (oif  euXoyijTog,  to  express  the  antithesis  between 
the  human  and  the  divine  nature  of  Christ,  he  must  have  said  o 
xai  wr,  or  J  a  vzog  wv  (qui  idem  est  dominus  omnium  rerum). 
But  in  Rom.  1:  3,  4,  the  two  clauses  of  the  sentence,  in  which 
Christ  in  considered  x«ra  cdgyia  and  xcrra  nvevfAa,  are  connected 
neither  by  a  xai  nor  by  an  avzog.^  Moreover,  the  words  ^iog  fu- 
loytjjog  ftg  xovg  atMvag,  are  not  placed  in  opposition  to  the  words 
TO  itazd  oorpjca,  but  must  be  connected  with  the  preceding  o  im  ndv- 
t(ov  to  which,  even  according  to  Justi's  own  explanation,  neither 
xai  nor  amdg  is  required  ;  and  they  contain  the  reason,  why  he  who 
xdza  adgyia  was  descended  from  the  fathers,  could  still  be  said  to  be 
im  ndvTiov.     And   the  clause  to  xaid  adgxa,  which  is  frigid  and 

1  The  Rabbinical  expressions  •pan''  nin"' ,  and  -psn''  Ctt? ,  (see  Gabler's 
Journal  for  select  theological  literature,  1804,  Vol.  I,  p.  547),  can  prove  nothing 
against  the  uniform  usage  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  LXX,  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

2  It  has  been  proved  (in  the  Dissert,  of  Flatt  sup.  cit.),  that  it  cannot  be  taken 
for  granted,  that  Paul  placed  the  word  dsog  in  Rom.  9:  5  first,  in  order  to  lay  pe- 
culiar stress  upon  it.  For,  even  if  the  stress  was  to  have  been  laid  on  -^sog,  the 
same  is  the  case  in  those  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  God  is  oppos- 
ed to  the  pagan  deities  ;  and  yet  sv^oyt^rog  is  placed  first  in  every  instance  in 
which  the  substantive  verb  («/)t2^  yivofiai)  is  wanting  in  the  doxology. 

3  Flatt's  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  p.  25  etc.  4  See  note  5  infra,  on  Heb.  1:  3. 
5  Ewald  on  the  Dignity  of  Jesus,  p.  92. 


^  42.]  ATTRIBUTES  OF  CHRIST DEITY.  ^9 

useless  according  to  Justi's  explanation,  possesses  an  appropriate 
signification,  only  when  the  whole  sentence  is  rendered  thus :  "  Christ 
as  the  adorable  God,  is  exalted  over  all  things  (or,  over  all  the  an- 
cestors of  the  Jews)."^ 

V".  Heb.  1:  8,  ngog  di  top  vlov — aiMvog  but  to  the  Son  on  the 
other  hand,  he  says,  "  Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  forever  and  ever." 
In  reference  to  this  passage,  in  which  the  words  of  Ps.  45:  7,  o 
^Qovog  oov,  6  'deog^  elg  top  ccitova  tou  aiwi^og,  are  applied  to  Christ ; 
it  may  be  remarked,'^  that  the  usage  of  the  language  admits  of  no  other 
explanation  than  one,  by  which  a  human  king  is  called  God  in  the 
proper  sense.  Nor  can  a  single  instance  be  found,  in  which  an  in- 
dividual specified  person  is  called  by  the  name  D■'J^b^f.,  in  any  other 
than  the  proper  sense  of  the  word. 

The  explanation  of  the  words  o  ^govog  aov,  6  ^aog^  as  signifying, 
"  God  is  the  security  of  thy  throne,"  which  is  adopted  by  Socinians 
and  by  Grotius  ;  is  inconsistent  with  the  scope  of  the  whole  passage, 
which  is,  to  evince  the  preeminence  of  Christ  above  angels.^  More- 
over, both  the  ancient  and  the  modern  translators  considered  the 
phrase  o  &f6g,  as  being  in  the  vocative  case. 

On  the  passage  2  Pet.  1:  3,  in  which  Oela  dvixxiug  (divine  pow- 
er) is  attributed  to  Christ,  the  reader  may  recur  to  Illustration  6. 

I  would  not  appeal  to  Tit.  2:  13,  inasmuch  as  it  appears  not  to 
be  a  correct  opinion,  (though  Henke  subscribes  to  it)^  that  i(  fxtya- 
iXov  '&SOV  did  not  refer  to  Christ,  the  article  t  a  v  before  awtrigog 
would  need  to  be  repeated.^  For  the  same  reason,  it  may  be  doubt- 
ed, whether  in  2  Thess.  1:  12,  rotl  i9*oo  ^V^w*',  as  well  as  jcu^/of, 
ought  not  to  be  joined  with  'Jfjaov  Xgiaxov.  But,  in  1  Tim.  6:  13, 
where  Jesus  Christ  (v.  14)  and  God  (v.  15)  are  distinguished  from 
one  another,  no  article  is  found  between  the  words  too  {^eov  zov 
Co)onoiovvTog  ra  navza  and  XQtaiov  ^Jrjaov. 

III.  12.     Other  names  hy  which  Christ  is  designated, proving  his 

divinity. 

Other  names  are  given   to  Christ  in  Scripture,  which  amount  to 
the  same  as  d^eog.     In  1  John  1:  2  (comp.  5:  20)  he  is  denomina- 
ted 7]  ^  CO  7]  7]aiMvcog  eternal  life.     The  words  i  y  m  a  ifA,  ^,  in 
I  John  13:  19.  8:  24,  28,  signify,  "  I  am  God;^^  as  has  been  proved, 

1  Even  if  the  writings  of  the  apostle  Paul  did  not  contain  any  formal  doxology 
to  Jesus,  still  the  predicates  which  are  ascribed  to  him  in  the  passages  of  Paul, 
adduced  in  Illust.  6,  7,  9,  accord  with  a  doxology,  in  the  most  perfect  manner. 

2  Commentary  on  the  Hebrews,  Note  4. 

3  See  Ewald  sup.  cit.  p.  98—102. 

*  Lineamenta  Inst,  fidei  Christianas,  p.  73.  j 

Wolfii  Curae  philol.  ad  1.  c. 

37 


290  ^  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II, 

in  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John  (p.  400  etc.) 
For  (ifitl  is  a  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word  fiwn  (comp.  LXX 
Deut.  32:  39 ;)  which  according  to  the  usage  of  the  Hebrews  and 
Arabs,  signifies  God ;  and  the  Greek  word  avzog  has  the  same  sig- 
nification in  1  John  2:  29. 

Christ  is  also  called  xvgiog  Lord,  in  1  Cor.  8:  6  (comp.  <5>  33. 
Illust.  1.  ^42.  lllust.  9. 

He  is  called  nv&v^iaTtxt]  n  e  i  g  a  axoXovdovoa  the  spirit- 
ual rock  which  accompanied  them,  1  Cor.  10:  4.  In  the  Comment, 
on  Heb.  12:  26,  these  words  are  explained  in  the  following  manner: 
"  The  invisible  (and  supremely  perfect)  rock,  who  accompanied  the 
Israelites,  through  whose  agency  [ex,  like  the  Heb.  73]  they  were 
enabled  to  drink  (out  of  the  material  rock.")  In  Deut.  32:  10 — 12, 
God  is  said  to  have  accompanied  the  Israelites  ;  and  in  the  same 
chapter,  v.  14,  15,  18,  the  name  rock  (■^i:^)  is  applied  to  him.— > 
IIvsv^iuTticog  designates  the  almighty  power  of  God.  See  GaL 
4:  29.  Rom.  4:  17 — 21.  The  reader  may  consult  Michaelis'  Notes 
on  the  1st  epist.  to  the  Corinthians  (p.  232 ;)  and  Ewald's  Religions-p 
lehren  der  Bibel.  Vol.  II.  p.  136  etc.  ' 

The  name  Christ  is  itself  a  divine  compellation.  For,  in  2  Cor. 
11:  10.  Rom.  11:  1,  Paul  swears  by  the  name  of  Christ.  In  the 
Dissert,  on  the  epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  ihe  former  of  these  pas- 
sages, ioih  dXi]&ft.a  Xgcarov  h  if.ioi,  is  explained  by  "  Mihi  cer- 
tissimum  est."  ("^^^.i!  V'^;  Gen.  41:  32.)  '^kriOita  Xoiarov,  ac- 
cording to  a  well  known  Hebrew  idiom,  signifies  the  same  as  dkrj&eiu 
diov,  namely,  res  verissima. 

Finally,  what  the  Old  Testament  asserts  of  God,  is  also  applied 
to  Christy  John  12:  41,  on  fUe^  irjv  do'^av  ccviov.  (comp.  with  v.  40 
and  Is.  6:  10.)  The  word  avtov,m  this  passage,  must  be  referred 
to  Christ ;  as  well  as  in  v.  37,  42.^  Now,  the  40th  v.  of  this  ch. 
corresponds  with  Is.  6:  1 — 5,  where  the  prophet  is  describing  the 
glory  of  God  ;  consequently,  by  applying  this  passage  to  Christ, 
John  ascribes  divine  glory  to  him.  Heb.  1:  10—12,  unto  the  Son 
he  saith.  Thou  Lord  in  the  beginning  of  all  things  didst  create  the 
earth,  and  the  heavens  are  the  work  of  thine  hands  :  they  shall 
pass  away,  but  thou  remainest :  they  shall  grow  old  as  a  garment, 
and  thou  shalt  fold  them  up  as  a  vesture  to  change  them.  Comp. 
Ps.  102:  26—28.  Heb.  12:  26.  (comp.  Deut.  5:  22  etc.)  Here 
Christ  is  represented  as  the  person,  who  revealed  himself  on  Sinai ; 
ov  ri  (fbivri  iriv  yriv  iadkfvas  ton'  and  consequently  as  God  himself^ 

i  Dissert.  I,  in  libros  N.  T.  historicos,  p.  87  etc. 
2  Soe  Comment,  on  Plebrews,  in  loc.  Note  o. 


^  43.]  liMPORTANCE  OF  THE  DOCTRINE. 


991 


SECTION  XLIir. 

Importance  of  the  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ, 

No  one  can  detract  from  the  supreme  dignity  of  Christ,  without 
either  totally  denying  him  that  adoration  which  is  his  due,  or  offer- 
ing it  in  an  improper  manner  ;(1)  and  without  detracting  also  from 
the  value  of  that  salutary  influence  which  he  has  exerted  and  still 
exerts  on  mankind.  For,  on  the  dignity  of  his  person  (<§>  82,  78) 
the  importance  of  this  influence  is  suspended.  Accordingly  Chris- 
tians, at  their  first  reception  among  the  professors  of  this  religion, 
which  places  the  divine  worship  of  Jesus  in  indissoluble  connexion 
with  christian  piety, (2)  are  dedicated  to  Christ  as  God, (4)  by  the 
ordinance  of  baptism. (3) 

Illustration  1. 

The  obligation  of  men  to  believe  in  Christ  as  God. 

Whoever  wilfully  contradicts  the  declarations  of  Jesus,  relative  to 
his  exalted  nature  and  the  adoration  which  is  due  to  him,  or  who 
refuses  to  believe  in  the  dignity  of  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God 
[matevfiv  tw  ovo^iaiL  tov  ^Jrjaou  Xginiou,]  is  guilty  of  transgressing 
•the  divine  command,  and  is  as  far  from  pleasing  God,  as  he  who  is 
destitute  of  love  for  his  fellow  man.  1  John  3:  23,  aurrj  eoriv  ^ 
ivToXt]  uvTOv^  'iva  711(71  fvaotfAev  tiu  ovo^utv  TOf  iHOV  avtov  JfjOOU 
Xgiotov,  xut  ayun<i)f.iev  dlli^kavg  tliis  is  his  commandment,  that  we  be- 
lieve on  the  name  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  love  one  another,  comp. 
V.  22.  John  3:  35,  36,  J  UTiftOfoif  tm  via),  ovk  oij.>fiai  ^ty/yV,  akk'  rj 
ogytjTov  Ofov  fAt'pEc  in  (xuroif  he  that  believeth  not  on  the  Son, 
shall  not  see  life ;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him.  On  the 
disastrous  influence  which  antiscriptural  representations  of  Christ 
may  have  on  our  conduct ;  the  reader  may  consult  the  work  on  the 
Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  <§»  103. 

III.  2.      The  same  subject  continued. 

Since  it  is  a  fact,  that  it  has  pleased  God  to  take  the  man  Jesus 
into  an  extraordinary  union  with  himself,  to  commit  all  things  into 
his  hands,  to  appoint  him  the  immediate  judge  of  the  world,  and  to 
bestow  his  love  and  blessings  upon  us  only  through  him ;  we  are 
called  upon  by  love  to  the  Father  and  by  reverence  for  him,  as  well 


292  THE  TRINITY.  [bK. 


as  by  our  dependance  on  him  to  make  us  happy  both  in  the  present 
and  the  future  world — in  short,  we  are  called  upon  by  our  piety  as 
Christians,  to  love  and  honour  Christ,  as  being  just  what  the  Father 
has  represented  him,  and  to  repose  our  confidence  in  him.^  In  the 
Dissert.  '*  On  the  Spirit  of  Christianity,"^  it  is  proved,  that  the 
dignity  and  exalted  nature  of  the  person  of  Christ,  constituted  a 
principal  subject  of  the  instruction  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles. 

III.  3.   The  genuineness  of  the  Baptismal  Formula,  matt.  28: 19. 

Matt.  28:  19,  noQiv&ivxeg  ovv  ^a^tjievoaxe  navva  ra  i&V7}y 
Pami^ovteg  aviovg  tig  to  ovofia  too  nazQog  nai  rov  vlov  xal  tov 
dyiov  nvivfiUTog.  Go  therefore,  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  bap- 
tizing them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  The  doubt  which  has  been  advanced  by  Teller,  rela- 
tive to  the  genuineness  of  this  passage,  is  not  only  unsupported  by 
any  critical  authority,  but  is  not  favoured  by  the  conjecture,  which 
has  been  derived  from  the  circumstance,  that  in  several  passages  of 
the  New  Testament,  instead  of  "  baptism  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holv  Ghost"  [tig  to  ovof.ia  TOT  UATPOi: KJl  TOT 
'TIOT  KAf  TOT'AUOT  nNETMATOi:;\  baptism  in  the 
name  of  Christ  only  is  mentioned  ;  as,  for  example,  in  Acts  8:  16. 
19:  5,  dg  to  ovofxa  tov  y.vglou  'Jtjoov.  Acts  10:  48.  2:  38,  iv  and 
liuTM  ovofxazi'/rjaov  Xqkjtov.  Gal.  3:  27.  Rom.  6:  3,eig  Xgiazo'v. 
For,  it  is  manifest,  that  the  latter  mode  of  expression  originated 
merely  from  abbreviation  ;  and  for  the  same  reason,  also,  the  word 
baptism  is  sometimes  placed  entirely  alone,  without  any  additional 
clause  ;  as  in  Acts  8:  12.  16:  15.  18:  8.  And  if  the  writers  of  the 
New  Testament  wished  to  abbreviate  the  formula  of  baptism  which 
Christ  used  at  the  institution  of  this  ordinance,  they  would  not  be 
likely  to  use  the  first  words,  eig  to  ovoiioi  tov  nuTQog,  in  the  name 
of  the  Father,  instead  of  the  whole  ;  for  these  words  could  not 
sufficiently  distinguish  the  christian  profession  of  faith,  from  that  of 
the  Jews.  On  the  other  hand,  the  words  hg  to  ovof^a  tov  vlov 
(Ifjoov  XgcGtou,)  in  the  name  of  the  Son  Jesus  Christ,  could  with 
propriety  be  used  instead  of  the  whole  formula,  without  an  imper- 
fect expression  of  its  spirit ;  since  no  one  can  baptize  in  the  name 
[i.  e.  to  the  honour]  of  Jesus  Christ  (Illust.  4,)  who  does  not  in  the 
baptism  confine  himself  strictly  to  the  instructions  and  command  of 
Christ,  and  of  course  also  to  the  formula  prescribed  by  him.  More- 
over, it  is  evident  from  Acts  19:  2 — 5,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
named  at  the  baptism  of  those  very  persons  of  whom  it  is  simply 

1  See  Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  105—197. 

2  Flatt's  Magazine,  Vol.  I.  p.  11—126. 


^  43.]  THE  BAPTISMAL  FORMULA.  29^ 

said,  that  they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  And 
in  Titus  3:  4 — 6,  where  baptism  [lovigov  naXtyyeveolag  the  wash- 
ing of  regeneration]  is  spoken  of,  there  is  an  express  mention  of  the 
Father  [{teog  amiriQ  v.  4,]  of  the  Son  ['hjaovg  Xgtatog  ocjtrjg  v.  6,] 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  [nvsvfia  aytov  v.  5.]  And  Justin^^states, 
that  it  was  a  custom  among  the  earliest  Christians,  to  baptize  in  the 
name  of  the  Father  and  Lord  of  all  things,  and  of  Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Teller  has  asserted,  that  Marcion 
rejected  the  baptismal  formula ;  but  he  does  not  cite  any  passage  in 
proof  of  the  fact,  and  I  can  find  no  such  passage;  but  even  if  the 
fact  could  be  proved,  it  would  be  no  argument  against  the  genuine- 
ness of  this  text,  for  we  know  that  Marcion  rejected  the  whole  Gos- 
pel of  Matthew,  (as  being  the  Gospel  of  a  Jewish  apostle,  and  in- 
tended originally  for  the  Hebrews,)  and  of  course  he  rejected  the 
baptismal  form  found  in  Matt.  28:  19.^  Why  (it  has  been  asked) 
did  the  apostles  themselves  hesitate  so  much  to  receive  the  gentiles 
to  the  christian  church,  and  why  did  others  make  so  much  opposi- 
tion to  it  (Acts  10:  11,)  if  they  had  an  explicit  command  of  the 
Lord,  to  baptize  all  nations,  without  any  distinction,  and  of  course 
the  gentiles  ?"  To  this  Bekhaus  replies  :  "  Is  it  not  possible  for  the 
apostles  sometimes  to  have  lost  sight  of  this  command  of  Jesus  ? 
Were  they  not  under  the  influence  of  a  secret  national  prejudice 
against  the  pagans  ?  And  may  they  not  have  had  many  conscien- 
tious obstacles  to  contend  with  in  the  execution  of  this  command  ?** 

III.  4.     Divine  honour  ascribed  to  Christ  in  baptism. 

The  words  eigio  ovoixa  (Matt.  28:  19)  must  properly  be  transla- 
ted in  honour  of.  For,  ovoiia  signifies  honour,  dignity  :  compare 
Heb.  1:  4,  where  ovo^jia  is  synonymous  with  dola  and  r«/M»J  ch.  2:  9. 
5:  4.  and  Is.  48:  9,  where  the  words  tsiy  [name]  and  tiVnn  [praise] 
are  parallel  terms  ;  and  1  Chron.  22:  5,  where  nnfi^Dl?  [glory^  splen- 
dour] and  Q^i  [renown]  are  synonymous.^  Nor  will  the  sense  be 
changed,  if  with  Paulus,''  we  translate  these  words  literally  :  "  In 
reference  to  ihe  name  vlog"  In  the  same  manner,  also,  may  the 
phrases  inl^  zm  ovofA-uTt  and  fV  ovofiait,  be  translated  ;  and  even  the 
expression  sig  Xgcavov,  has  the  same  signification.  Compare  Mic. 
4:  5,  T-Aw  D">V2  ^V.?.  we  will  walk  in  the  name  of  Jehovah.  Philip. 
— _ __.  J __ 

1  Justini  Apologia  II,  ed.  Colon,  p.  94. 

2  Bekhaus  on  the  jjenuineness  of  the  baptismal  formula,  Offenb.  1794. 

3  See  the  Dissert,  on  the  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  ch.  2:  9,  Note  i.  and  on 
Heb.  1:4,  Note  ra. 

4  Comment.  P.  III.  p.  920. 

5  fjil-tis,  comp.  Gal.  5:  13.  1  Thess.  4:  7.  Eph.  2:  10. 


294  THE  TRINITY.  [bK,  IU 

2:  10,  tv  tut  ovofJLttti  'Jr}Gov  in  honour  of  Jesus  (compare  Ps.  63:  5, 
•^SD  N'Jffi*  '^^^^j3  in  thy  name  will  I  lift  up  my  hands.)  Col.  3:  17, 
Tidvia  tv  ovo^iuTV  xv^jIov  ' /r}Goo  {jiOHit)  perform  all  things  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.^ 

But  if  baptism  is  to  be  performed  in  honour  of  Jesus,  or  the  Son  ; 
then  he  is  here  not  regarded  merely  as  a  teacher  (I  Cor.  10:  2.) 
Otherwise,  baptism  in  the  name  of  so  great  a  teacher  as  Paul,  could 
not  have  been  so  unbecoming  a  thing  as  he  himself  represents  it,  1 
Cor.  1:  13,  15.  The  honour  which  Christ  intends  shall  be  paid  him 
by  baptism,  is  the  honour  of  the  Son,^  Christ  does  indeed  require 
faith  in  his  doctrines  (Matt.  28:  19,  comp.  Acts  18:  8.  16:  15.) 
But  they  are  to  be  received  as  the  doctrines  o{the  Son,  of  him  who 
as  Son^  is  exalted  far  above  all  teachers  and  messengers  of  God  (1 
Cor.  1:  13 — 15,)  as  the  doctrines  of  the  Redeemer  and  Lord  of  the 
church  2fiTHP  xai  KrP/Oi:.  1  Cor.  1:  13,  (Christ  alone  is  Lord 
and  Redeemer  of  the  whole  church.)  Rom.  6:  3,  {fig  lov  ddi/aiov 
avTOu  t(iunTiadi]^iev  by  his  death,  Christ  becomes  the  awnjp  of  the 
church.)  Eph.  5:  23 — 26,  (by  baptism  Christ  has  consecrated  the 
church  to  himself,  as  her  Head  and  Redeemer,  ^((fuXri  lijgiitxkrfGiag 
xat  aonrjg  tou  aojfxazog.)  Acts  16:  31 — 33,  {niaifvaov  enliov  avQtov 
'/rjcrovv  Xgioiov — xai  l^unTiaOt)  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  be  baptized.)  8:  16,  {^t^auTiaf-itpov  imriQiov  tig  to  ovofia  xov 
iuvqIov  'Jrjoov  they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.) 
Hence  it  is  evident,  that  the  honour  which  the  professors  of  Chris^ 
tianity  are  commanded  to  give  to  Christ  in  baptism,  is  certainly  a 
divine  honour — [intxaXovfAt'voig  to  llvo^a  tov  xvgtov ' /riao^  Xgioiov^ 
who  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  ^anzioat^tTitite^ 
Xeodiiivog  to  ovofia  avzov^  to  be  baptized,  calling  on  his  name)— ;it 
is  such  an  honour  as  he  had  demanded  previously  to  the  institution 
of  the  ordinance  of  baptism,^  and  such  as  had  actually  been  shown 
him  by  the  apostles  before  that  time  ;  for  we  are  Xo\d,TiQOiit'Am>riattv 
OLVTM^  they  worshipped  him  or  made  obeisance  to  him,  Tigoaxt;- 
vi^aavTtguuTOu^  worshipping  him. 

As  it  has  been  proved  (<§>  42,)  that  it  is  our  duty  to  worship 
Jesus,  as  being  God  in  the  highest  sense  of  the  word  ;  so  the  hon- 
our shown  to  the  Son  in  baptism,  must  necessarily  be  the  same 
honour  (John  5:23)  as  that  ascribed  to  the  Father  in  this  ordinance  ; 
and  therefore  divine  honour  in  the  strictest  sense  (1  Pet.  3:  21.) 

1  See  Dissert.  I,  in  libros  N.  T.  histor.  p.  89.     (Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  III.  p.  91. 

2  Matt.  28:  19.  Gal.  3:  26.  (comp.  4:  4—7.)  Acts  8:  37. 

3  John  1:  18.  3:  31,  11—17.  Col.  1:  13—22.  Matt.  28:  18,  19.  Heb.  1:  2. 

4  1  Cor.  1:13.  comp.  v.  2.  f 

5  Acts  22:  16.  6  John  5:  18—23.  10:  28—33.  comp.  §  42.  Illust.  7,  6. 
7  Matt.  28:  17.  8  Luke  24:  52.  John  20:  28.  See  §  42.  Illust  11. 


^  44.]  THE  BAPTISMAL  FORMULA.  295 


Just  as  circumcision  was  a  declaration,  on  the  part  of  its  subjects, 
that  Jehovah  was  the  God  of  the  posterity  of  Abraham  (Gen.  17: 
10 — 14.  comp.  1:  7  etc.,)  and  that  they  regarded  themselves  under 
obligation  to  live  to  the  honour  [C'^>.  in  the  name,  Mic.  4:  5]  of  Je- 
hovah ;  so  also,  by  baptism  in  honour  of  the  Father  and  the  Son 
(<§>  112,)  its  subjects  declared  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  the 
God  of  the  Christians,  whom  they  are  bound  to  adore,  and  to  whom 
they  are  permitted  to  have  access.  This  l^^st  clause  is  found  in  1 
Pet.  3:  21,  where  the  words  lntQ(xn7ma  avvud^afwg  ayw&rjg  fig 
^iov  signify,  *'  that  baptism  procures  us  an  acceptable  approach  to 
God  with  a  good  conscience,  through  the  resurrection  and  glory  of 
Christ." 


SECTION  XLIV. 


There  is  a  real  difference  hetiveen  the  Father  and  the  Son  ;  but 
they  are  not  two  Gods. 

Independently  of  the  union  of  the  Son  with  the  man  Jesus,  he  is 
so  distinguished(l)  from  ilie  Father,(2)  that  we  are  obliged  to  ac- 
knowledge not  only  a  logical  but  a  real  distinction  between  them. 
(3)But  as  the  Scripiures  teach,  that  the  Son  is  God,  in  the  same 
sense  (<§>  42)  as  the  Father  ;(4)  and  yet  as  there  is  but  one  God 
{<5>  28  ;)  therefore  we  must  regard  this  distinction,  which  has  a  foun- 
dation and  is  a  real  disiinctioo,  as  being  such  a  dislinction  as  does 
not  imply  a  plurality  of  Gods. (5)  The  omnipotence  of  the  Son  is 
no  other  than  the  omnipotence  of  the  Father,  but  is  one  and  the 
same  omnipotence. (6)  The  omniscience  of  the  Son  and  the  omnis- 
cience of  the  Father,  are  one  and  the  same. (7)  In  a  word,  the 
very  same  and  the  entire  divine  perrecl(on(S)  which  belongs  to  the 
Father,  belongs  also  to  the  Son. (9)  Col.  1:  19. 

Illustration   1. 

John  1  7:  5,  Ao'ia  tj  iixov  ngo  zoviov  xoafiop  eivai,  nag  a    a  o  I 
the  glory  which  1  had  with  thee  before  the  world  existed,  ch.  1:  1, 
b  koyog  ^v  ng'd  g  t  ov  ■&  t  6  v  the  Wor(J  (or  Logos)  was  with  God  : 
!  conop.  1  John  1:  2. 


296  THE  TRINITY.  [bk.  II. 

III.  2. 1  John  1 : 2, tJ  C^rj  ij oLnovtog,  rjiig ^v  n gog  top  naTtga 
that  life  eternal  was  with  the  Father.  John  \1:  2^/ H  y  a  n  ri  g  a  g 
ft  6,  n  a  T  6  g,  n(j6  xaTal3oXrjg  x6of^ov  thou  lovedst  me,  O  Father, 
before  the  creation  of  the  world.  See  Comment,  on  Hebrews,  p.  8 
etc. 

f 
III.  3.     The  distinction  between  Father  and  Son  is  reaL 

It  was  not  God  [o  '&e6g],  considered  as  distinct  from  the  Logos  [Ap- 
^og],  but  it  was  that  Logos  who  was  with  God  [o  Xoyog  6  ngog  xov 
<&66v  John  1:  1,2],  that  became  man  [odg^  iytveio^].  Or,  accord- 
ing to  1  John  1:  2,  that  eternal  life  which  was  with  the  Father,  re- 
vealed himself  to  men  [rj  Cw»J  ?J  aimviog,  ^'jiig  riv  ngog  tov  nctztga 
icpavegMx^ri  tJju?*/].  The  phrases,  "  the  Logos  was  with  the  Father," 
"  he  was  in  the  Father's  bosom,  "  the  Father  loved  him,"  will  not 
suffer  us  to  conceive  of  the  distinction  between  the  Father  and  the 
Logos,  as  a  difference  merely  of  relation,  sustained  by  one  and  the 
same  person.  Thus,  for  example,  it  would  be  absurd  to  say,  God, 
considered  as  one  who  promoted  and  still  promotes  the  happiness 
of  mankind,  through  the  man  Jesus ;  was  with  God  considered  as 
the  Creator  of  the  world. "^ 

III.  4.  1  Cor.  8:  6,  -deog  6  natiig,  i^  ov  rd  navTcc — eTg  xvgiog 
IrjGovg  Xgtazog,  dc  ov  rd  tkxvtu  God  the  Father,  of  whom  are  all 
things — one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  are  all  things.  John  17: 
1,  3.  1:  1,  2.  comp  v.  18.   1  John  1:  2. 

III.  5.     The  unity  of  God. 

The  proposition,  "  God  was  the  Word  [^sog  ijv  d  loyog,"]  rec- 
tifies our  idea  of  the  phrase  preceding  it, "  the  Word  was  with  God  ;'^ 
and  guards  against  such  a  misconstruction  as  would  contradict  the 
unity  of  God.  The  proposition,  "  the  Word  was  with  God," 
is  in  precisely  the  same  predicament  with  the  proposition  in  dog- 
matics, "  the  Father  and  the  Logos  are  two  persons  J^  As  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  Logos  and  the  Father,  is  the  only  one  of  its 
kind,  and  is  a  distinction  of  which  we  have  neither  a  perfect  concep- 
tion nor  an  appropriate  expression  ;  the  sacred  writers  had  to  use 
the  language  of  approximation,  or  to  borrow  terms  from  things 
which  are  know  to  us :  such  as  two  men  who  stand  connected,  who^ 
are  intimately  united  with  each  other,  as  a  father  and  his  son.  Thus,  " 
too,  the  word  person  is  only  a  term  of  approximation  :.  it  calls  up     | 

1  V.  14.  comp.  V.  18. 

2  On   the   Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  471  fF.  comp.  Flatt,  de   Deitate 
Christi,  p.  30  etc. 


§  44.]  DISTINCTION  IN  THE  GODHEAD.  297 

the  idea  of  two  human  persons,  but  is  intended  to  denote  a  mere 
negative  idea,  or  to  deny  that  the  difference  is  merely  a  difference 
of  relation  sustained  by  a  single  person.  The  language  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  Art.  1,  is  this:  "  Et  nomine  personae  utuntur 
ex  significatione,  qua  usi  sunt  in  hac  causa  scriptores  ecclesiastici,  ut 
significet  non  partem  aut  qualitatem  in  alio,  sed  quod  proprie  sub- 
sistit ;"  i.  e.  and  by  the  word  person,  is  meant,  not  a  pai't  or  a 
quality  in  another,  but  that  which  has  itself  a  subsistence ;  as  the 
word  is  used  by  ecclesiastical  writers  on  this  subject. 

III.  6.  John  10:  30,  iycoxal  6  jiutijq  iV  iofiev  I  and  my  Father 
are  one  ;  comp.  v.  28,  29. 

III.  7.     The  omniscience  of  the  Father  and  the  So7i,  is  one. 

John  16:  13,  to  irvevfia  iiigalrjd^siag,  oacc  oiv  aaovat]  (compare  1 
Cor.  2:  10,  11)  kaXt]Ge&  the  Spirit  of  truth  shall  speak  the  things 
which  he  shall  hear.  The  same  idea  is  expressed  thus  in  v.  14: 
ix  Tou  iftov  ?,7JxpsTai,  xal  amyyeXet  vf*7v,  and  in  v.  15,  it  is  added, 
Tiavia  oau  e'x^i  6  naT?jg,  eud  iait. 

III.  8.     The  nature  of  the  divine  perfection  in  the  Trinity. 

By  the  divine  perfection,  is  here  meant  the  combined  whole  of 
all  the  predicates  contained  in  the  idea  of  God,  as  they  are  stated 
above  (<§>  20 ;)  although  it  is  not  denied,  that  the  threefold  distinc- 
tion between  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  close  union 
of  these  three  with  one  another,  constitute  a  great  perfection  of  the 
Deity.  Each  of  these  three  (persons)  sustains  a  relation  to  the 
other  two,  which  is  peculiar  to  himself  But,  as  to  each  (person) 
there  belongs  a  certain  relation  to  the  others  peculiar  to  itself  the 
perfection  of  the  divine  Being  does  not  so  much  consist  exclusively 
of  the  characteristics  which  are  appropriated  to  any  owe  of  the  three 
(persons,)  as  e.  g.  to  the  Father  ;  but  rather  in  the  close  union  of 
these  appropriate  characteristics  with  the  peculiar  characteristics  of 
the  other  two,  e.  g.  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  this 
divine  perfection,  which  proceeds  from  the  reciprocal  relation  of  the 
three  (persons,)  or  which  is  founded  on  the  indissoluble  union  of 
each  with  the  other  two ;  belongs  in  common  to  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit.^ 

Dr.  Taylor  has  objected  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity :  that 
"  the  peculiar  character  which  each  of  the  two  persons  Father  and 
Son,  possesses,  must  be  a  'perfection  ;  and  consequently  a  perfection 
is  lacking  to  each  of  them  ;  and  hence  neither  of  them  can  be  an 

1  Flatt.  de  Deitate  Christi.  p.  97.  -. 

38 


298  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

infinitely  perfect  being,  i.  e.  be  God."  This  objection  is  thus 
answered  by  Flatt,  de  Deitate  Christi  (p.  97  etc.):  *' If  the  ex- 
pression divine  Being  [ovala  divina,  God]  be  taken  in  a  more  ex- 
tended sense,  so  as  to  embrace  in  it  what  are  termed  the  personal 
characteristics  ;  then  it  is  evident,  that  all  the  three  persons  consti- 
tute one  divine  Being  [one  Godhead.]  But  if  by  divine  Being 
[God,]  we  mean  the  complex  of  those  characteristics  and  attributes 
which  are  ascribed  to  the  Deity  or  supreme  Being  by  natural 
religion,  and  thus  exclude  the  personal  characters  from  our  idea  of 
the  Deity  ;  then  this  idea  is  applicable  to  all  the  three  persons  of 
the  Godhead.  And  as  it  cannot  be  proved  that  the  peculiar  charac- 
teristics of  either  of  the  three  persons,  is  a  perfection  inferior  to  the 
peculiar  characteristics  of  the  other  two  persons  ;  it  does  not  follow, 
that  one  is  less  perfect  than  the  others,  or  that  either  of  these  persons 
is  not  possessed  of  divine  perfection  in  the  highest  degree. 

III.  9.  As  the  Father  cannot  be  separated  from  the  Logos,  who 
became  man  and  assumed  a  human  form  [eycu  h  tat  nazgi,  xal  o 
ncirtJQ  iv  iftol  ;^]  we  may  say,  that  the  father  also  revealed  himself 
(John  14:  7 — 9)  in  the  man  Jesus,  with  whom  the  Xoyog  -O^eog 
united  himself,  John  1:  1,  14.  1  John  1:  2. 

"  The  idea  commonly  attached  to  the  word  person,  is  that  of  an 
intelligent  subsistence,  or  of  a  being  subsisting  by  himself,  apart 
from  others.  This  idea,  it  is  evident,  cannot  with  propriety  be  ap- 
plied to  the  relation  existing  between  the  Logos  and  the  Father  ; 
for  the  Logos  cannot  be  regarded  as  existing  apart  from  the  Father. 
Tl  ey  can  be  considered  as  two  persons,  or  intelligent  subsistences 
[v7ionTao6ig,]  only  so  far  as  something  (e.  g.  the  incarnation)  can 
be  ascribed  to  one  (the  Logos,)  which  cannot  equally  be  attributed 
to  the  other  (the  Father.)^'^ 

1  John  14: 10.  10:  23,  30,  comp.  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John, 
p.  196, 478  ff. 

[2  On  this  mysterious  and  important  doctrine,  wliich  is  so  intimately  inteif- 
woven  with  the  whole  economy  of  redemption,  it  is  important  to  the  theological 
student  to  be  habituated  to  tiie  most  rigid  propriety  and  precision  of  language. — 
And  as  it  may  be  interesting  as  well  as  instructive  to  the  critical  reader,  to  have 
access  to  the  phraseology  of  distinguished  divines  on  this  subject ;  1  shall  add' 
some  brief  extracts  from  the  systems  of  the  most  distinguished  theologians.  I 
select  only  from  the  works  of  Lutherans,  because  they  are  most  rarely  accessible 
to  the  American  Student  : — And  (1)  from  the  illustrious  M.  Chemnitz,  whom 
Tribbechovius  terms,  "  Theologorum  facile  princeps."  He  says  (in  his  work, 
"  De  duabus  naturis  in  Chrislo"):  "Essentia  divina  praedicatur  de  Patre,  de 
Filio,  et  de  Spiritu  Sancto,  non  ut  genus  de  speciebus,  nee  ut  species  de  individnis^ 
nee  ut  totum  de  partibus,  sed  alio  quodam  ineftabili  et  incomprehensibili  modo. 
Hypostases  vero  seu  personae  Trinitatis  omnes  nnum  sunt." — (2)  Dr.  Finck,  who 
lived  about  the  close  of  the  IGth  century,  about  forty  years  after  the  death  of  Chem- 
nitz, says  :  "  Gott  Vater,  Sohn.und  Heiliger  Geist  :"Der  Vater  der  einen  Sohn  von 
Ewigkeit  zu  seinem  Ebenbilde  gezeugt,  der  Sohn  so  vom  Vater  gebohren  ist, 
tind  der  Heilige  Geist,  der  vom  Vater  und  Sohn  auf  unerforschliche  Weise  aus- 


^  45.1  DIVINITY  OF  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  299 


SECTION   XLV. 

Divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Just  as  the  Son,  who  revealed  himself  to  the  world  in  the  man 
Jesus,  is  joined  with  the  Father  in  the  formula  of  baptism  (§  43. 
Ilhist.  4,)  because,  although  there  is  a  distinction  between  him  and 
the  Father,  he  is  nevertheless  one  and  the  same  God  with  the 
Father;  so  also  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  same  formula(l)  joined 
with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  because,  although  there  is  a  similar 

gehet."  (Loci  Commun.  p.  107.)— (3)  William  Lyser,  Doctor  and  Professor  of 
Divinity  in  the  University  of  Wittenbergf,  says  :  "  Trinitas  est  unitas  in  essentia 
trium  personarurn — Unitas  essentiae  distinctionem  personarum  non  tollit,  nee 
distinctio  personarum  unitalem  essentiae  multiplicat."  (Systema  ihetico-exe- 
geticum,  p.  130,  edit.  J.  G.  Neumanni,  1G80.)— (4)  M.  Dav.  Hollatzius  (Examen 
Theolog.  Aeroamatic.  a  most  excellent  work,  which  the  pious  author,  instead  of 
dedicating  to  the  illustrious  personages  of  his  age,  formally  inscribed  "  To  the 
Triune  God,"  in  terms  of  the  most  ardent  and  intense  devotion,  on  p.  311)  says  : 
*' Augustissimum  venerandae  Trinitatis  mj'sterium,  modo  simplissirao  at  pian- 
issimo traditurusostendat,  quod  Deus  unus  sit:  Quod  unus  Deussit  Pater, Filius, 
et  Spiritus  Sanctus  :  Quod  alius  sit  Pater,  alius  Filius,  alius  Spiritus  Sanctus  : 
Quod  Pater  in  aeternum  generet  Filium,  Filius  ab  aeterno  a  Patre  sit  genitus, 
Spiritus  Sanctus  a  Patre  et  Filio  procedat." — (4)  The  indefatigable  and  learned 
Dr.  Buddeus,  successively  the  ornament  of  Cobourg,  of  Halle,  and  of  Jena  Uni- 
versities, says  :  "  Observandum,  Scripturam  sacram  diserte  et  luculenter  docere, 
I.  Patrem  a  Filio,  Filium  a  Patre,  et  ab  uiroque  Spiritum  Sanctum  realiter  dif- 
ferre,  ut  alius  sit  Pater,  alius  Filius,  alius  Spiritus  Sanctus: — 11.  Non  solum 
Patrem, sed  etiam  Filium  et  Spiritum  Sanctum  esse  verum  et  aeternum  Deum  : 
—III.  Nee  tamen  tres  esse  Deos,  sed  Deiirn  unum."  (Theol.  Dogniat.  p.  266:) 
— (5)  Dr.  S.  J.  Baumgarten,  a  most  profound  divine,  who  might  not  unaptly  be 
styled  the  Lutheran  Edwards,  says  :  *'  Sutnma  doctrinae  de  Trinitate  hue  redit, 
ut  credamua,  I.  Patrem,  Filium,  et  Spiritum  Sanctum  esse  verum  Deum  ;singu- 
losque  ad  unum  Deum  ita  pertinere,  ut  unus  Deus  sit  Pater,  Filius,  et  Spiritus 
Sanctus: — II.  hunc  Patrem,  Filium,  et  Spiritum  vere  difFerre,  ut  snpposita  in- 
telligentia  seu  personas  : — III.  has  tres  personas  habere  eandem  esseniiam,  sibi- 
que  invicem  non  solum  similes,  verum  etiam  aoquales  simul  esse: — et  IV. 
demum,  has  tres  personas  non  essentiali  aliqua  re  ad  Deum  in  se  considerata 
pertinente  difFere,  sed  actibus  internis  et  exinde  ortis  relationibus,  quibus  efficia- 
tur,  ut  unaquaeque  sit  alia  a  reliqiiis,  non  tamen  aliud  quid."  (Evangelische 
Glaubenslehre,  Vol.  I.  p.  448  ) — (6)  We  shall  close  this  note,  with  the  definition 
of  that  luminous  and  truly  philosophic  divine,  Dr.  Mosheim,  whose  Elementa 
theologiae  dogmaticae  is  one  of  the  most  scientifically  systematic  and  lucid 
works  which  Europe  has  produced  on  the  subject  of  dogmatics  :  "  Docet  enira 
Revelatio,  in  Deo  tametsi  simpliciter  unus  sit,  esse  tamen  partitionem  quendam, 
quae  tamen  ternarium  numerum  non  excedat,  et  realiter  in  essentia  divina  dis- 
tingui  debere  Patrem,  Filium,  et  Spiritum  Sanctum.  Theologi  hoc  dogma  his 
verbis  enuntiare  solent :  In  una  essentia  divina  tres  sunt  personae  consubstantia- 
les.  Pater,  Filius,  et  Spiritus  Sanctus. — Propositio  haec,  tametsi  generatim  oa- 
piatur  et  intelligatur.  hand  tamen  demonstrari,  sed  solo  testimonio  divino  firmari 
potest,  neque  omni  ex  parte  capitur  et  intelligitur."  Vol.  I.  p.  307,  308,  ed.  3d. 
See  also  the  discriminating  remarks  of  Moras  on  this  subject.  Epitome  TheoL. 
Christianae,  p.  59—71,  ed.  4th,  1799.    S.] 


300  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  11. 


distinction  between  him  and  the  Father  and  the  Son,  yet  he  is 
united  in  the  closest  manner  with  both,(2)  and  is  one  and  the  same 
God  with  them,  to  whom  the  subjects  of  baptism  addressed  them- 
selves (1  Pet.  3:  21,)  and  to  whom  they  pay  adoration.  There  are 
other  passages  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  either  distinguished  from 
the  Father  and  the  Son, (3)  or  represented  as  one  with  God. (4) 
And  the  same  omniscience  is  specifically  ascribed  to  him, (5)  which 
is  attributed  to  the  Father  and  the  Son. (6) 

Illustration  1. 

2  Cor.  13:  13,  »J  xoioig  lou  -avqiov  \/i^aov  XgtOTov  xal  r\  ayant} 
rov  '&eov,  nal  tJ  xoivmi^ia  tov  7iv6UfA.aT0i;  dyiov  the  grace  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  the  love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  1  Cor.  12:  4 — 6,  to  avro  nv^vfia — o  aviog  xvgtog — o  aviog 
Otog  the  same  Spirit — the  same  Lord — the  same  God.  1  Pet.  1: 
2.  comp.  Jude  20,  21.  On  the  text  1  John  5:  7.  See  Tiibing. 
Gehlehrte  Anzeigen  ;^  Griesbach's  Remarks  on  Hezel's  Vindication 
of  1  John  5:  7,  Giessen,  1794,  (contained  also  in  Hezel's  "  Schrift- 
forscher  ;"^)  Griesbach's  Novum  Testamentum,^  appendix  Diatribe 
in  locum  1  John  5:  7,  8.  Mori  Praelect.  exeg.  in  tres  Johannis 
epistolas.'* 

III.  2.  John  15:  26,  o  nagdxJ^rjTog,  ov  ty(a  ntfuilKo  nagd  xov 
nazgog  the  Paraclete  (or  Monitor)  whom  I  will  send  from  the  Fath- 
er. Matt.  10:  20,  lo  nvtv^a  lou  nargog  the  Spirit  of  the  Father. 
Rom.  8:  11.  comp.  6:  4.  Rom.  8:  9  etc.  Gal.  4:  6,  itajiiOTeiUv  6 
^£og  TonviVfiu  zov  vtov  avrov  God  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son. 

III.  3.  John  I4t  16,  ukXov  nagdyiXrjTov  d'Q)Gi&  vfilv  sc.  o  naTf]g 
the  Father  will  give  you  another  Monitor.  15:  26.  16:  13 — 15. — 
On  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  reader  may  consult 
Schmidt's  "  Christliche  Religionslehre  ;"^  Schott's  Epitome  Theol. 
Christ.  Dogm.  (p.  182 ;)  and  his  Preacher's  Journal  for  the  pro- 
motion of  piety  .^ 

III.  4.  1  Cor.  2:  11.  In  this  passage,  the  relation  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  to  God,  is  represented  as  analogous  to  the  relation  subsisting 
between  the  spirit  of  man  and  man.  Compare  1  Cor.  3:  16.  and  6: 
19,  (comp.  3:  17,  to  ooi^u  vfiMv  vaog  tov  iv  v^lv  dylov  nviv^iaxog 
ioTi — vaog  tov  i>*ou  iaii  v(Aelg  your  body  is  the  temple  of  the  Holy 

1  No  72,  for  1785.         2  Vol.  II.  P.  III.  3  Vol.  II.  2ed.  Halle,  1806. 

4  p.  68—77.  5  p.  105,  Giessen,  1808. 

e  Vol.  II.  P.  I,  Leipsic,  1811.  No.  3.  p.  110. 


'^  46.]  DISTINCTION  IN  THE  GODHEAD.  301 

Spirit  in  you — ye  are  the  temple  of  God.)  Compare  also  2  Cor.  6: 
16.  In  Acts  5:  3,4,  the  phrases  yjevaaa{tat  to  nvevfAa  ayiov  and 
^pevaaadai  toj  d^iro   are  synonymous. 

III.  5.  Another  divine  attribute,  namely  unlimited  power,  is  at- 
tributed to  the  Spirit  in  1  Cor.  12:  8,  9,  II,  navra  tavta  tvegyai 
TO  TTvsvfia,  diuigouv  fxadrqj  xat9a)?/?oJA6ra«  all  these  are  wrought 
by  the  Spirit,  apportioning  to  each  one  as  he  will. 

III.  6.  I  Cor.  2:  10,  to  nvevfia  navza  igevva,  aal  xa  ^a&r]  xov 
-d-fov  the  Spirit  discerns  all  things,  even  the  secret  purposes  of  God. 
The  whole  passage  from  v.  9—13,  as  Morus  says,  attributes  to  the 
Spirit,  ^'  Scire  consilia  Dei,  ei  soli  nota,  aliis  omnibus  utique  ignota^ 
[to  know  these  counsels  of  God,  which  are  known  only  to  God  and 
are  unknown  to  all  others."]  In  John  16:  13—15,  the  same 
knowledge  is  ascribed  to  the  Spirit,  as  to  the  Father  and  Son,  even 
a  knowledge  of  future  things  [tcjv  igx^f^^'^^^]' 


SECTION    XLVI. 


The  nature  of  the  distinction  between  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spir- 
it, can  neiiher  he  explained  nor  expressed  by  words,^ 

Accordingly,  we  represent  to  ourselves  these  three  distinct  (per- 
sons,) Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit,  as  one  God  ;  and  worship  them 
as  such.  But  at  the  same  time  we  must  confess,  that,  just  as  many 
other  things,  especially  such  as  relate  to  the  Godhead,  transcend  the 

1  Morus,  Epitome  Theologiae  Christ,  p.  66.  note  1. 

[2  On  the  words  persona,  vnoaraaigj  nQoaojitoVf  ovaia,  ojnoov'acogj  etc.  as  ap- 
plied  to  the  Divine  Being,  some  interesting  discussion  may  be  found  in  Prn- 
tessor  Stuart's  Letters  to  Wm.  E.  Channino'  (p.  22 — 30,  ed.  3d  j)  in  Baumgarten's 
Olaubensiehre  (Vol.  I.  p.  429—434  ;)  and  Semler's  Einleitung  (Vol.  I.  197,  229. 
III.  314— 316.)  Much  was  said,  about  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  concerning 
the  tendency  of  these  terms  to  lead  to  tritheism  ;  and  among  the  advocates  for 
itheir  expulsion  from  theological  disquisition,  might  be  mentioned  a  number  of 
the  first  divines  of  the  age,  not  excepting  Hunnius  and  even  Luther  himself. — 
Yot,  to  prevent  the  charge  of  Arianism  or  Socinianism,  which  he  knew  his  ene- 
mies would  eagerly  seize  the  least  pretext  to  prefer  against  them,  Luther  yielded 
to  Melancthon's  wishes,  and  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  is  couched  in  the  old  scholastic  terms.  On  this  subject,  the  sentiments 
ti^"  the  ablest  divines  of  the  present  day  have  been  thus  expressed  by  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Miller  :  "  We  found  it  in  use  ;  and  not  knowing  a  better  term  for  the  pur- 
pose intended,  we  have  cheerfully  adopted  and  continue  to  use  it  still.  We  by 
neans  understand  it,  however,"  in  a  gross  or  carnal  sense."  S] 


no  u 


302  THE  TRINITT.       .  [bK.  II 

powers  of  our  comprebension  ;  so  also  are  we  unabte  to  compre 
hend  the  nature  and  mode  of  the  distinction  which  subsists  betweei 
the  Son,  who  became  man,  and  the  Father,  by  whom  he  is  "  wel 
beloved ;"  or  the  nature  and  mode  of  the  distinction  between  th 
Holy  Spirit  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Father  and  Son,  from  whon 
the  Spirit  was  sent  and  proceeded  forth  to  the  apostles,  on  the  othe 
(John  15:  26;)  and  that  therefore  we  are  unable  fully  to  expres 
this  distinction  by  any  word  or  phrase.(l)     It  is  this  inability  t 
comprehend  the  precise  nature  of  the  distinction  between  Fathe: 
Son  and  Holy  Spirit,  which  renders  it  impossible  for  us  to  explai 
how  this  distinction  coincides  with  the  unity  of  God,  a  doctrine  t 
which  we  inflexibly  adhere  :  [but  on  the  other  hand,  this  same  in; 
bility  also  renders  it  equally  impossible  for  any  one  to  prove,  th; 
the  unity  of  (lod  is  inconsistent  with  this  distinction.]  (2) 

Illustration  I. 

On  the  incomprehensibility  of  the  distinction  in  the  persons 
the  Trinity,  the  reader  may  consult  the  work  (of  Dr.  Storr)  on  tl 
Object  of  the  Gospel  and  epistles  of  John  ;*  Griesbach's  Introdu 
tion  to  the  study  of  popular  Dogmatics  (§  62 — 64)  ;  Schlege; 
**  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity  in  God,  again  considered  ;"^  Augustin, 
de  Trinitate  f  [Professor  Stuart,  On  the  divinity  of  Christ  ;'*  ail 
Dr.  Miller's  Letters  on  Unitarianism].^ 

The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  in  the  ecclesiastical  terminology  f 
dogmatics,  is  expressed  in  the  following  terms  :  (1)  "  In  una  int- 
visibili  Eueruia  [ovoiu],  subsitunt  tres  Personae  consubslantiaS 
[coessentiales  ofjioovatoi^]  Pater,  Filius,  et  Spiritus  Sanctus. — () 
Tres  in  Divinitate  Personae  vere  et  realiter  difFerunt." 

[On  the  important  and  difficult  subject  of  this  Illustration,  \3 
translator  cannot  deny  himself  the  pleasure  of  inserting  some  of  te 
remarks  of  Professor  Stuart.  S.] 

"  What  then,  you  doubtless  will  ask,  is  that  distinction  in  ie 
Godhead,  which  the  word  person  is  meant  to  designate  ?  I  ansvr 
without  hesitation,  that  I  do  not  know.  The  fact  that  a  distinctn 
exists,  is  what  we  aver ;  the  definition  of  that  distinction,  is  whs  I 
shall  by  no  means  attempt.     By  what  shall  I,  or  can  I  define  ? 

1  p.  470.  (see  above  §  44.  Illast.  5.)  9  Pt.  II.  sect  II.  p.  6 

3  Lib.  V.  cap.  9.  0pp.  Basil,  1543,  T.  III.  p.  331. 
*  Letters  to  Mr.  Cbanning,  on  the  divinity  of  Christ,  p.  35—38,  3d  ed. 
5  See  Letters  on  Unitarianism,  etc.  bj  Dr.  Miller,  Professor  in  the  TheologAl 
Seminary,  Princeton,  p.  70—88. 


<§,  46.]  DISTINCTION  IN  THE  GODHEAD.  303 

What  simile  drawn  from  created  objects,  which  are  necessarily 
derived  and  dependent,  can  illustrate  the  mode  of  existence  in  that 
Being,  who  is  underived,  independent,  unchangeable,  infinite,  eter- 
nal ?  I  confess  myself  unable  to  advance  a  single  step  here  in  ex- 
plaining what  the  distinction  is.  /  receive  the  fact  that  it  ^exists, 
simply  because  I  believe  that  the  Scriptures  reveal  the  fact.  And 
if  the  Scriptures  do  reveal  the  fact,  that  there  are  three  persons  in  the 
Godhead,  (in  the  sense  explained  ;)  that  there  is  a  distinction 
which  affords  ground  for  the  appellations  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy- 
Ghost ;  which  lays  the  foundation  for  the  application  of  the  person- 
al pronouns,  J,  thou,  he ;  whiclrrenders  it  proper,  to  speak  o(  send- 
ing and  bein<r  sent ;  of  Christ  being  tuith  God,  being  in  his  bosom, 
and  other  things  of  the  like  nature  ;  and  yet,  that  the  divine  nature 
belongs  to  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost ;  then  it  is,  like  every 
other  fact  revealed,  to  be  received  simply  on  the  credit  of  divine 
revelation. 

"  Is  there  any  more  difficulty  in  understanding  the  fact,  that  there 
is  a  distinction  in  the  Godhead,  than  there  is  in  understanding  that 
God  possesses  an  underived  existence  ?  With  what  shall  we  com- 
pare such  existence?  All  other  beings  are  derived ;  and,  of  course 
there  is  no  object  in  the  universe  with  whose  existence  it  can  be 
compared.  To  define  it  then,  is  beyond  our  reach.  We  can  ap- 
proximate towards  a  conception  of  it,  merely  by  negatives.  We 
deny  that  the  divine  existence  has  any  author  or  cause  ;  and  when 
we  have  done  this,  we  have  not  defined  it,  but  simply  said  that  a 
icertain  thing  does  not  belong  to  it.  Here  we  must  rest.  The 
boundaries  of  human  knowledge  can  never  be  extended  beyond  this. 

"  The  distinction  in  the  Godhead,  which  1  have  now  mentioned, 
I  ought  to  say  here,  we  do  not,  and  cannot  consider  as  a  mere  sub- 
ject of  speculation,  which  has  little  or  no  concern  with  ardent  piety, 
or  the  best  hopes  of  the  Christian.  We  believe  that  some  of  the 
most  interesting  and  endearing  exhibitions  of  the  divine  character, 
sare  founded  upon  it  and  connected  with  it ;  and  that  corresponding 
duties  are  urged  upon  us,  and  peculiar  hopes  excited,  and  consola- 
tions administered  by  it. 

"  In  regard  to  this  distinction,  we  say.  It  is  not  a  mere  distinction 
of  attributes,  of  relation  to  us,  of  modes  of  action,  or  of  relation 
between  attributes  and  substance  or  essence,  so  far  as  they  are 
linown  to  us.  We  believe  the  Scriptures  justify  us  in  these  nega- 
tions. But  here  we  leave  the  subject.  We  undertake,  (at  least, 
the  Trinitarians  of  our  country,  with  whom  I  am  acquainted,  under- 
take,) not  at  all  to  describe  affirmatively  the  distinction  in  the  God- 
bead.  When  you  will  give  me  an  affirmative  description  of  uride- 
\nved  existence,  I  may  safely  engage  to  furnish  you  with  one  of 


304  THE  TRINITY,  [bK.  II. 

person  in  the  Trinity.  You  do  not  reject  the  belief  of  self  existence, 
merely  because  you  cannot  affirmatively  define  it;  neither  do  we 
of  a  distinction  in  the  God-head,  because  we  cannot  affirmatively 
define  it. 

"  I  may  ask,  moreover,  What  is  the  eternity  o(  God  ?  You  answer 
by  telling  me,  that  there  never  was  a  time,  when  he  did  not  exist, 
and  never  can  be  one,  when  he  will  not  exist.  True ;  but  then, 
what  was  time,  before  the  planetary  system,  which  measures  it,  had 
an  existence  ?  And  what  will  time  be,  when  these  heavens  and  this 
earth  shall  be  blotted  out  ?  Besides,  passing  over  this  difficulty 
about  time,  you  have  only  given  a  negative  description  of  God's 
eternity :  you  deny  certain  things  of  him,  and  then  aver  that  he  is 
eternal.  Yet  because  you  cannot  affirmatively  describe  eternity, 
you  would  not  refuse  to  believe  that  God  is  eternal.  Why  then 
should  I  reject  the  belief  of  a  distinction  in  the  Godhead,  because  I 
cannot  affirmatively  define  it  ? 

"  I  do  not  admit  therefore,  that  we  are  exposed  justly  to  be 
taxed  with  mysticism,  and  absurdity,  when  we  aver  that  there  is  a 
distinction  in  the  Godhead,  which  we  are  utterly  unable  to  define. 
I  am  aware,  indeed,  that  a  writer  some  time  since  composed  and 
published,  in  a  periodical  work  then  edited  at  Cambridge,  a  piece 
in  which  he  laboured,  with  no  small  degree  of  acuteness,  to  show 
that  no  man  can  believe  a  proposition,  the  terms  of  which  are  unin- 
telligible, or  which  he  does  not  understand.  His  object  in  doing 
this,  appears  to  have  been,  to  fix  upon  a  belief  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  the  charge  of  absurdity.  But  it  seems  to  me,  the  whole 
argument  of  that  piece  is  founded  on  a  confusion  of  two  things, 
which  are  in  themselves  very  diverse  ;  viz.  terms  which  are  unin- 
telligible, and  things  which  are  undefinahle.  You  believe  in  the 
fact,  that  the  divine  existence  is  without  cause  ;  you  understand 
the  y«c^  that  God  exists  uncaused,  but  you  cannot  define  underived 
existence.  I  believe,  on  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  that  there 
is  a  real  distinction  in  the  Godhead  ;  but  I  cannot  define  it.  Still, 
the  proposition  that  there  is  a  real  distinction,  is  just  as  intelligible, 
as  the  one  that  God  is  self  existent.  A  multitude  of  propositions, 
respecting  diverse  subjects,  resemble  these.  We  affirm,  that  gravi- 
tation brings  a  body  tlirown  into  the  air,  down  to  the  earth.  The 
fact  is  perfectly  intelligible.  The  terms  are  perfectly  understood, 
so  far  as  they  are  the  means  of  describing  this  fact.  But  then,  what 
is  gravitation  ?  An  affirmative  definition  cannot  be  given,  which  is 
not  a  mere  exchange  of  synonymes.  Nor  can  any  comparison  de- 
fine it ;  for  to  what  shall  we  liken  it  ?"^ 

1  Stuart's  Letters   to   Wm.  E.  Channing,  p.  35—38,  3d  ed.  See  also  Storr's 
Sonn-und  Festtags-Predigten,  Vol.  I.  No.  35,  TQb.  1806. 


^  46,]  DISTINCTION  IN  THE  GODHEAD.  305 


LL.  2.     This  distinction  cannot  he  proved  inconsistent  with  the  di- 
vine unity. 

The  very  same  cause,  which  renders  it  impracticable  for  us  to 
prove  the  harmony  between  this  distinction  and  the  divine  unity, 
also  renders  it  impossible  to  prove,  that  the  assertion  of  a  threefold 
distinction   in  the  one    divine  Being,  involves  a  contradiction. — 

Whenever  we  find  a  real  contradiction  between  this  distinction 
and  the  unity  of  the  divine  Being,  it  only  follows,  that  in  every 
such  instance,  we  have  an  erroneous  idea  of  the  internal  distinction 
in  the  Godhead,  or  it  may  be,  an  incorrect  idea  of  the  one  divine 
Being  himself;  and  from  this  erroneous  idea  of  ours,  the  inconsis- 
tency wholly  results."^  Flatt,  in  his  work  de  Deitate  Christi,^  re- 
duces this  doctrine  to  the  Algebraic  universal  proposition,  which  ad- 
nits  of  no  dispute  :  "  Subjecta  A  et  B  (et  D)  ita  ad  se  invicem 
referuntur,  ut  commune  quidem  idem  numero  C  habeant,  sed 
iharactere  quodam  X  inter  se  difFerant  [The  relation  of  the  subjects 
A,  B,  (and  D)  to  each  other  is  such,  that  they  are  numerically  the 
ame,  in  regard  to  a  certain  something  termed  C;  but  they  differ 
Tom  one  another,  in  a  certain  property  called  X.] 

"  As  for  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  the  impossibility  of  giving  a 
positive  definition  of  the  distinction  between  Father,  and  Son,  and 
Holy  Spirit,  is  no  sufficient  reason  for  denying  the  distinction  itself, 
of  which  the  bible  assures  us.  For,  reason  when  left  to  herself  sets 
before  us  objects,  concerning  which  we  indeed  know  that  they  exist 
[to  0  r  t]  ;  but  concerning  whose  nature,  we  have  no  positive  know- 
ledge. We  can  only  distinguish  between  them  and  some  false  rep- 
resentations, or  determine  what  they  are  not ;  but  of  their  intrinsic 
nature,  how  they  are  [ion cog],  we  have  not  the  slightest  knowl- 
edge."3 

1  See  the  work  of  Dr.  Storr,  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  and  epistles  of  John, 

475  etc.  2  §  XIV. 

3  Dissert,  on  "  Kant's  Philosophische  Religionslehre,"  p.  7.  On  the  idea  of 
the  Trinity  advanced  in  Daub's  Theologumenis,  Heidelberg,  1805,  the  reader 
may  consult  Gabler's  Journal  for  select  theological  literature,  Vol.  V.  p.  523  etc. 
531  etc. 

39 


APPENDIX    TO    BOOK   II. 


BY      THE      TRANSLATOR, 


ON  THE  RELATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  TRINITY  TO  REASON, 

On  the  important  subject  of  the  relation  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  to  reason,  the  translator  begs  leave  to  subjoin  a  few  remarks 
All  that  can  be  well  known  on  this  subject  from  reason,  may  per- 
haps, when  reduced  to  its  elementary  principles,  be  embraced  in  the 
following  propositions  ;  which,  it  is  also  humbly  conceived,  contain 
satisfactory  solutions  of  the  difficulties  connected  with  this  view  of 
the  subject. 

Prop.  1.  A  divine  revelation  cannot  contain  any  thing  which  is 
contrary  to  the  plain  and  indisputable  dictates  of  reason. 

By  "  plain  indisputable  dictates  of  reason,"  we  mean  those  pro- 
positions in  all  the  various  departments  of  truth — mathematical, 
moral,  etc.,  the  evidence  of  which  is  such,  that  when  fairly  present- 
ed to  our  view,  the  constitution  of  our  mind  compels  us  to  believe 
them.  Such  are  all  the  self-evident  truths,  (sometimes  called  in- 
tuitive truths,  or  first  truths,  or  constitutional  judgments,)  and  all 
truths  derived  from  them,  the  evidence  of  which  is  so  strong  that  we 
are  compelled  to  yield  our  assent.  Such  are  the  derived  moral 
truths  embraced  in  natural  religion,  that  God  is  extremely  powerful 
and  intelligent  (but  not  that  he  is  omnipotent  or  omniscient.)  Now, 
as  these  propositions  are  the  natural  and  legitimate  product  of  the 
structure  of  our  mental  nature,  they  must  be  regarded  as  the  in- 
structions of  the  Creator,  from  whom  our  peculiar  mental  constitu- 
tion is  derived.  Hence,  if  they  were  contradicted  by  his  instructions 
in  revelation,  the  Creator  would  contradict  in  revelation  what  he 
teaches  in  nature,  that  is,  would  contradict  himself;  which  is  absurd  : 
therefore  a  divine  revelation  cannot  contain  any  thing  which  is  con- 
trary to  the  plain  indisputable  dictates  of  reason.  In  connexion 
with  this  principle,  there  is  no  dispute,  unless  it  be  alleged  that  v\e 
teach  the  existence  of  three  Gods,  and  that  the  unity  of  God  is  a 


APP.]  THE  TRINITY.  301 

» ■ — — — — — — — — ■ — — — — 

plain,  incontrovertible  dictate  of  reason,  which  would  be  contradicted 
by  tritheism.  To  this  we  reply,  First:  Even  if  we  did  teach  the 
existence  of  three  Gods,  there  would  be  no  dispute  relative  to  this 
principle  ;  for,  the  unity  of  God,  can  by  no  means  be  made  indis- 
putably evident  from  reason.  Unity  of  design  may  be  rendered  in 
a  very  high  degree  evident,  but  unity  of  person  (in  the  popular 
sense)  cannot.  But,  Secondly :  It  is  not  the  case,  that  Trinitarians 
believe  in  three  Gods,  as  may  be  seen  by  a  reference  to  their  res- 
pective creeds,  in  all  of  which  the  belief  in  one  God  is  as  explicitly 
stated  as  it  possibly  could  be.  If  it  be  still  alleged,  that  though 
Trinitarians  do  not  profess  tritheism,  yet  their  doctrine  inevitably 
leads  to  the  belief  of  three  gods  ;  then  this  objection  is  answered 
under  the  following  propositions. 

Prop.  2.  A  divine  revelation  cannot  contain  any  proposition  lohich 
demonstrably  involves  self-contradiction. 

It  will  be  admitted  that  truth  is  always  harmonious,  and  that  no 
two  truths  of  any  kind  are  contradictory,  i.  e.  subversive,  of  each 
uother  ;  neither  are  the  relations  of  truth.  A  contradictory  propo- 
sition is  that,  one  idea  of  which  is  manifestly  subversive  of  the  other, 
and  the  ideas  of  which,  the  constitution  of  our  minds  compels  us  to 
ibelieve  cannot  both  be  true  :  such  a  proposition  is  this,  '*  a  triangle 
is  a  square."  But  the  creator  has  so  formed  us,  that  of  two  propo- 
sitions which  are  contradictory,  if  the  first  be  clearly  proved  to  be 
true,  we  are  compelled  by  the  constitution  of  our  mental  nature  to 
believe  the  second  false.  For,  as  they  are  subversive  of  each  other, 
if  we  suppose  the  second  also  true,  it  would  destroy  the  first ;  so 
that  the  first  would  have  to  be  (true)  and  not  to  be  (true)  at  the 
same  time  ;  which  is  contrary  to  an  intuitive  or  self-evident  truth. 
Therefore,  as  God  is  the  author  of  our  mental  nature,  it  is  God  who 
compels  us  to  disbelieve  one  of  two  contradictory  propositions  ;  an<i 
hence,  if  his  revelation  contained  any  such  propositions,  he  would 
himself  compel  us  to  disbelieve  part  of  his  own  revelation.  But 
God's  object  in  giving  a  revelation  is,  that  it  should  be  believed; 
therefore  he  would  not  give  a  revelation  and  insert  propositions  in  it 
which  he  compels  us  to  disbelieve,  that  is,  contradictory  propositions  : 
therefore  a  revelation  coming  from  God,  cannot  contain  propo- 
sitions wJdcJi  demonstrably  involve  self-contradiction.  In  reference 
to  this  proposition,  it  has  been  alleged  by  some,  that  the  doctrine  of 
itbe  Trinity  involves  such  a  contradiction.  They  reason  thus :  The 
idea  of  one  and  the  idea  of  three  are  contradictory  and  subversive  of 
one  another,  so  that  the  same  thing  cannot  be  one  and  three  at  the 
same  time.  But  Trinitarians  affirm  that  God  is  one  and  three  at  the 
same  time ;  therefore  they  affirm  what  cannot  be  true,  i.  e.  a  con^ 
tradictory  proposition.  But  the  major  proposition  is  stated  in  a  loose 


308  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II, 

and  indefinite  manner,  and  is  not  true  in  every  instance  ;  for  a  tri- 
angle is  one  and  three  at  the  same  time,  when  considered  as  one 
among  many  figures,  and  in  reference  to  its  sides.  In  order  to  be 
true,  that  is,  admissible,  the  major  proposition  must  run  thus  :  "  It 
is  impossible  for  the  same  thing  to  be  1  and  3  in  the  same  respect 
at  the  same  time.'^  To  this  we  assent ;  but  in  this  form,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  is  by  no  means  embraced  under  it ;  for  it  need 
not  be  told  to  the  intelligent  reader,  that  Trinitarians  unanimously 
deny  that  God  is  one  and  three  in  the  some  respect.  They  ex- 
pressly teach,  that  God  is  one  in  one  respect,  and  three  in  another 
respect.  The  first  respect  they  denominate  by  the  term  essence, 
and  the  second  by  the  term  persons.  Therefore,  as  the  Trinitarian 
proposition  is  not  embraced  in  the  major,  the  conclusion  of  course  is 
not  applicable  to  it. 

But  it  has  been  objected,  that  some  of  the  phraseology  of  Trini- 
tarians, expressive  of  the  reciprocal  relation  between  the  persons  of- 
the  Godhead,  involves  contradiction.  Those  who  advance  the  ob- 
jection, reason  thus  :  The  one  God  is  said  to  be  threefold  in  his  per- 
sons ;  but  each  person  is  the  one  God  ;  therefore  each  person  is 
threefold.  But  the  major  is  not  clearly  stated.  The  idea  intend- 
ed is  this,  "  God  who  is  one  (i.  e.  God  in  the  respect  in  which  uni- 
ty is  affirmed  of  him,  namely,  in  essence)  is  three  in  person  (i.  e. 
in  another  respect,  called  person ;)  but  each  person  (i.  e.  God,  in 
each  of  the  respects  called  persons)  is  the  one  God  (i.  e.  is  God,  in 
the  respect  in  which  unity  is  affirmed  of  him,  namely,  in  essence  :) 
But  this  minor  is  not  true ;  therefore  the  conclusion  is  a  non  se- 
quitur."  In  order  to  cover  the  conclusion,  the  syllogism  must 
stand  thus  :  "  God  in  (essence)  the  sense  in  which  he  is  one,  is  also 
three  (in  the  same  sense,  essence  ;)  but  each  of  these  three  (persons) 
is  God  in  the  sense  in  which  he  is  one  (in  essence ;)  therefore  each 
of  these  three  (persons)  is  three  in  the  sense  (in  essence)  in  which 
God  is  one."  But  it  need  scarce  be  mentioned  that  we  deny  the 
major  and  minor,  as  strenuously  as  any  other  persons  can  :  for  we 
deny  that  he  is  one  and  three  in  the  same  sense.  If  it  be  alleged, 
that  explanations  of  the  distinction  in  the  Supreme  Being  have 
sometimes  been  attempted,  and  from  these  and  the  language  of 
Trinitarians  in  general,  it  is  evident  that  they  understand  the  terms 
essence  and  person,  in  a  manner  which  necessarily  involves  self- 
contradiction  ;  it  must  be  admitted,  that  this  has  unfortunately 
sometimes  been  the  case.  But  this  will  not  be  surprising  when  we  I 
recollect  the  inexplicability  of  the  divine  nature,  and  the  high  de-  > 
gree  of  mental  discipline  which  is  requisite,  before  men  can  clearly  j 
discern  the  proper  limits  of  the  human  understanding.  Nor  are  the  ! 
divines  of  the  present  day  responsible  for  any  phraseology  but  their  I 


APP.]  DOCTRINE  OF  TRINITY  RATIONAIi.  309 

dwn  ;  and  we  believe  they  uniformly  disavow  the  terms  and  ideas 
objected  to.  They  believe  that  God  is  one  in  one  respect,  and  three 
in  another  respect.  To  the  respect  in  which  he  is  one,  they  give 
the  name  essence ;  the  other  respect,  in  which  he  is  three,  they 
designate  by  the  term  person.  But  in  so  doing  they  do  not  intend 
to  convey  any  positive  ideas  of  the  several  respects  to  which  they 
tire  applied.  They  are  to  be  considered  as  equivalent  to  the  Alge- 
braic letters  X  and  Y,  which  stand  for  unknown  quantities  or 
properties  ;  as  if  it  had  been  said,  "  in  X  respect  God  is  one,  and 
in  Y' respect  he  is  three  :"  and  thus  the  propositions  are  no  more 
contradictory  than  if  we  were  to  say,  "  a  triangle  inX  respect  (i.  e. 
considered  as  a  figure)  is  one,  and  in  Y  respect  (in  reference  to  its 
sides)  it  is  three  ;"  or,  that  "  man  in  X  respect  (in  reference  to  his 
soul  and  body)  is  two  fold,  and  in  Y  respect  (considered  as  an  indi- 
vidual of  our  race)  is  one."  We  do  not  forget  that  the  triunity  of 
the  triangle  results  from  its  material  properties,  inasmuch  as,  like  all 
matter,  it  consists  of  parts  ;  and  that  God  is  without  parts  [ens 
simplicissimum  :]  but  we  do  not  adduce  these  examples  to  prove  from 
analogy  either  the  truth  or  the  possibility  of  the  Trinitarian  doctrine; 
its  truth  must  rest  on  divine  record,  and  if  that  is  established  its  pos- 
sibility necessarily  follows.  We  only  state  these  as  several  uncon- 
nected propositions,  but  similarly  constructed  and  of  course  equally 
void  of  contradiction.  Moreover,  as  we  do  not  define  the  distinction 
in  the  Deity  at  all,  it  cannot  be  urged  that  we  define  it  to  be  such 
Eis  depends  on  parts ;  hence,  the  absence  of  parts  in  God,  cannot  be 
edleged  as  an  argument  against  the  distinction  which  is  negatively 
proposed.  For,  it  is  impossible  that  there  should  be  contradiction 
between  terms  the  ideas  of  which  are  all  strictly  negative,  and  do 
not  imply,  by  inference  either  more  or  less  remote,  any  idea  of  a 
ositive  nature. 

*ROP.  3.  A  divine  revelation  might  naturally  be  expected  to  teach 
tilths  untaught  by  reason. 

That,  after  all  our  advances  in  knowledge,  there  always  have 
en  and  still  are  many  truths  physical  and  moral,  connected  with 
our  world,  which  are  unknown  to  us,  will  be  admitted.  Hence,  in 
giving  us  a  revelation,  it  was  at  least  possible  for  God  to  leach  us 
truths  unknown  to  reason.  But  that  if  he  gave  a  revelation,  he  ac- 
tually would  teach  such  truths  (either  to  enforce  truths  previously 
known,  or  unconnected  with  them,)  is  evident  from  the  nature  of 
the  case.  If  God  gives  a  revelation,  such  a  revelation  must  have 
been  necessary,  or  not.  If  it  was  not  necessary,  then  God  gave  a 
revelation  unnecessarily.  But  God  does  nothing  unnecessarily  ; 
therefore,  if  he  gave  a  revelation  it  was  necessary.     Now,  the  reve- 


310  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

lation  which  it  was  necessary  for  God  to  give,  must  either  contain 
some  truths  or  relations  of  truths  unknown  to  us  before,  or  not.  But 
if  it  contains  none  but  such  as  we  knew  before,  it  was  unnecessary 
for  God  to  give  it.  But  it  was  necessary,  or  he  would  not  have 
given  it ;  therefore  a  revelation  from  God  might  naturally  be  ex- 
pected to  teach  truths  unknown  to  us  before,  truths  untaught  by 
reason.  Such  are  the  sanctions  of  his  law,  the  doctrines  concerning 
angels,  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  the  Trinity. 

Prop.  4.  We  have  no  reason  to  expect,  that  our  limited  capacities 
should  be  able  to  comprehend  fully  the  modes  and  circumstances 
and  relations  of  those  truths  which  reason  could  not  teach,  and 
which  are  known  only  by  revelation,  any  more  than  of  those 
trtiths  known  without  revelation  ;  but  it  is  natural  to  expect  that 
the  contrary  would  be  the  case. 

It  is  evident  that  the  adorable  Author  of  our  being  has  fixed  with 
the  utmost  precision,  the  limits  of  the  human  understanding.  Our 
minds  are  so  constructed,  that  whatever  is  necessary  for  the  practical 
purposes  of  life,  we  can  know,  and  know  with  certainty.  But  in 
the  whole  store  of  our  knowledge,  whatever  be  its  nature,  or  what- 
ever the  subject  to  which  it  relates,  there  is  not  a  single  particular 
to  which,  in  some  of  its  circumstances  or  relations,  there  is  not  some 
mystery,  something  inexplicable  attached.  The  fact  of  the  attrac- 
tion of  gravitation  we  know  ;  and  it  is  upon  the  certainty  and  uni- 
formity of  this  fact,  that  all  its  boundless  utility  in  the  mechanical 
arts,  as  well  as  in  the  explanation  of  the  phenomena  of  physical  na- 
ture, depends.  But  where  is  the  mechanic,  or  where  the  philoso- 
pher, who  can  explain  the  cause  or  the  mode  of  operation  of  this 
wonderful  principle  ?  The  fact  of  the  tendency  of  the  magnetic 
needle  to  the  pole,  is  known  ;  and  relying  on  its  certainty,  and  on 
the  uniformity  of  the  other  laws  of  nature,  the  mariner  confides  his 
all  to  the  bark,  which  gravitation  keeps  upon  the  surface  of  the  wa- 
ter, and  spreading  his  canvass  to  the  winds  of  heaven,  steers  with  i 
security  his  adventurous  course  through  every  clime.  Yet  who  can 
explain  the  cause  of  this  wonderful  phenomenon,  or  the  mode  of  its 
operation  ?  But  let  it  not  be  supposed  that  the  nature  and  relations 
of  those  general  and  important  facts  are  peculiarly  mysterious. — 
Mystery  equally  profound  and  equally  great,  is  no  less  a  concomi- 
tant of  every  object  around  us,  even  of  such  as  appear  the  most 
trifling  or  the  best  understood.  Let  the  pen  wnth  which  I  am 
writing  demonstrate  this  truth.  Who  can  tell  how  (in  obedience  to 
the  divine  will)  it  grew  to  its  slender  form  ?  or  what  philosopher 
can  explain  the  nature  of  that  something,  (called  by  men  cohesive 
attraction,)  by  which  its  particles  are  held  together  ?    In  short,  in 


[JAPP.]  DOCTRINE  OP  TRINITY  RATIONAL.  311 

our  present  state  we  are  a  mystery  to  ourselves  ;  and  every  object 
around  us  presents  abundant  evidence  that  the  Creator  has  definitely 
fixed  the  hmits  of  our  knowledge,  and  told  us,  Hitherto  shall  thou 
come,  and  here  shall  the  proud  range  of  thine  intellect  be  stayed. 
Therefore 

It  will  be  admitted,  that  either  the  intrinsic  nature,  or  the  mode 
of  subsistence,  or  some  of  the  relations  or  circumstances  of  every 
thing  or  truth  connected  with  the  present  world,  is  incomprehensible 

I  to  us. 
:  And  it  will  be  admitted,  that  the  incomprehensibility  of  those 
'modes  and  circumstances  of  truths  which  are  incomprehensible  to 
us,  arises  either  from  their  intrinsic  nature,  or  from  the  limited 
character  of  our  faculties  ;  and  that  it  is  probably  impossible  for 
God  himself  to  enable  us  to  understand  some  of  them  without  first 
enlarging  our  faculties. 

And  it  will  be  admitted,  that  we  know  less  of  the  future  world 
than  of  the  present,  and  that  the  little  knowledge  which  we  have 
concerning  it,  is  in  its  relations  more  enveloped  in  mystery.  Hence 
it  follows,  a  fortiori^  that  if  it  is  impossible  for  our  present  limited 
capacities  to  comprehend  the  modes  and  circumstances  of  the  truths 
of  the  present  world,  which  are  less  mysterious  ;  much  less  can  they 
comprehend  those  of  the  truths  relating  to  the  future  world,  which 
are  more  mysterious. 

Again :  The  same  relation  between  a  certain  truth  which  was 
unknown  and  other  truths  and  principles  which  were  known  and 
understood,  which  led  the  mind  to  the  discovery  of  the  unknown 
truth,  also  implies  some  similarity  or  analogy  or  connexion  with  the 
truth  which  was  known  and  understood  ;  by  virtue  of  which  the 
truth  discovered  is  also  at  least  in  some  degree  intelligible.  And 
the  same  relation  between  the  faculties  of  the  human  mind  and  an 
unknown  truth,  by  virtue  of  which  there  was  a  peculiar  adaptation 
in  the  mind  for  the  discovery  of  that  truth,  rather  than  that  of  others 
which  it  never  could  discover,  and  for  a  knowledge  of  which  we  are 
indebted  to  revelation  alone,  also  implies  a  peculiar  adaptation  in 
the  mind  to  understand  the  truth  discovered.  Thus  the  fact  that 
Ithe  illustrious  Kepler  was  able  to  comprehend  those  principles,  a 
knowledge  of  which  led  him  to  the  discovery  that  the  orbits  of  the 
'planets  are  not  spherical  but  elliptic,  also  implied  his  ability  to  com- 
prehend the  properties  and  relations  of  an  ellipsis  ;  and  his  compre- 
hension of  these  and  of  the  related  truths,  conducted  him  to  the 
additional  discovery  that  the  planets,  in  their  revolutions,  describe 
j  equal  areas  in  equal  times.  The  acquaintance  of  the  great  Sir 
Isaac  Newton  with  the  revolutions  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  those 
enlarged  views  of  the  solar  system  as  one  connected  whole,  which 


312  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

led  him  to  the  thought  that  the  same  principle  which  brought  the 
apple  to  the  ground,  might  (as  it  reached  without  any  sensible 
diminution  to  the  summit  of  the  highest  mountains)  as  well  extend 
to  the  moon  and  other  planets,  implied  in  him  an  ability  to  compre- 
hend the  effects  of  this  principle  when  once  the  thought  had  been 
started.  Similar  to  this  is  the  case  of  those  truths,  relative  to  the 
existence  and  nature  of  God,  which  reason  teaches.  Thus,  it  is  an 
undisputed  principle,  that  the  framer  of  a  machine,  in  the  structure 
of  which  there  are  evidently  design  and  adaptation  to  an  end,  must 
bean  intelligent  being.  And  perceiving  the  manifest  design  andj 
adaptation  in  the  construction  of  the  universe,  men  may  justly  inter| 
the  intelligence  of  the  Author  of  it.  Now,  the  relation  between  the 
doctrine  that  God  is  an  intelligent  Being  and  the  principle  that 
every  machine  manifesting  design  and  adaptation  must  have  an  in- 
telligent being  for  its  author,  implies  some  analogy,  or  similarity  oti 
connexion  between  them,  from  which  it  results  that  as  the  principl^ 
is  intelligible,  the  doctrine  which  flows  from  it  will  be  so  also,  aj 
least  in  some  degree ;  and  that  the  same  adaptation  of  the  humari 
faculties  and  knowledge  of  related  truths  which  led  to  the  discovery 
of  the  doctrine,  or  which  enables  us  to  perceive  evidences  of  it^ 
truth,  also  implies,  at  least  in  some  degree,  the  ability  to  comprej 
hend  the  truth  discovered.  From  these  considerations  it  necessaril) 
follows,  that  we  have  reason  to  beheve  that  those  truths  which  are 
contained  in  a  divine  revelation  and  are  also  taught  by  reason,  are 
in  their  nature  less  incomprehensible  and  less  involved  in  mysteriom 
relations,  than  those  between  which  and  the  knowledge  obtamed  b} 
our  natural  facilities,  there  is  no  such  analogy  or  connexion  as  couk 
lead  to  their  discovery,  or  could  afford  evidence  of  their  truth  aitei 
they  are  revealed.  Hence,  it  follows  that  among  the  truths  con^ 
tained  in  a  divine  revelation,  the  mode  and  relation  of  those  whic^ 
were  taught  by  revelation  alone  [articuli  puri]  will  probably  be  mor^ 
mysterious  than  of  those,  of  which  the  hght  of  nature  affords  U! 
some  knowledge.  And  hence  it  follows,  in  reference  to  the  Deity 
that  as  the  mode  and  many  of  the  relations  of  those  truths  relative 
to  the  nature  of  the  divine  Being  which  are  taught  by  reason,  arc 
absolutely  incomprehensible,  it  may  naturally  be  expected  that  i 
any  additional  truths  are  revealed  to  us  on  this  subject,  their  modj 
and  relations  would  be  still  more  mysterious;  inasmuch  as  thej 
would  have  no  analogy  or  similarity  to  the  knowledge  which  w^ 
possess.  .  J 

Finally ;  in  reference  to  those  truths  relative  to  the  divine  Bemj 
(such  as  omniscience,  knowledge  of  future  contingencies  and  th^ 
like)  which  are  taught  by  reason,  we  find  those  relations  of  then', 
which  were  incomprehensible  by  the  light  of  reason,  just  as  incom, 


APP.]  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  TRINITY  RATIONAL.  313 

iprehensible  after  the  truths  to  which  they  refer  have  been  also 
taught  by  revelation,  as  they  were  before.  But  if  it  were  the  in- 
tention of  God,  that  we  should  fully  comprehend  all  the  relations 
of  the  truths  contained  in  his  revelation,  he  would  at  least  have 
perfected  our  knowledge  of  the  relations  of  those  truths  which  even 
reason  had  taught  us  to  understand.  But  this  he  has  not  done. — • 
Therefore  it  is  not  his  intention,  and  we  have  no  ground  to  expect, 
that  our  limited  capacities  should  be  able  to  comprehend  the  modes 
and  circumstances  and  relations  of  those  truths  which  reason  could 
not  teach,  and  which  are  known  only  by  a  revelation,  Sny  more 
than  of  those  truths  known  without  revelation ;  but  on  the  contrary, 
t  is  natural  to  expect,  that  their  relations  would  be  still  more  en- 
i^eloped  in  mystery. 

Prop.  5.  We  can  believe,  and  it  is  our  duty  to  believe,  those 
truths  of  revelation  which  are  untaught  by  reason,  as  far  as  they 
are  revealed,  i.  e.  made  comprehensible,  but  no  farther  ;  for  this 
is  impossible,  and  the  Scriptures  do  not  require  it. 

i  It  will  be  admitted,  that  almost  every  thing  in  which  we  believe 
taking  the  word  in  its  popular  latitude)  is  in  some  respect  or  other 
oexplicable.     We  believe  that   we  exist   (without  requiring  the 
amous  argument  of  Des  Cartes  to  convince  us  of  the  fact ;)  yet 
here  are  a  thousand  things  relative  to  the  mode  of  our  existence 
i^hich  we  cannot  understand.     We  believe  the  existence  of  all  the 
xternal  objects  of  which  we  obtain  a  knowledge  through  the  medi- 
um of  our  senses  ;  yet  relative  to  every  one,  it  were  easy  to  pro- 
iQse  some  interrogatory  to  which  no  man  could  give  a  satisfactory 
eply.     We  believe  in  all  those  relations  of  visible  objects  and  of 
bstract  truths,  the  evidence  of  which  appears  to  the  human  mind 
atisfactory  ;  yet  what  reflecting  mind  does  not  know,  that  mystery 
nvelopes  all  those  particulars  of  our  faith  ?     The  chymist  believes 
1  all  those  beautiful  affinities  of  his  science,  the  existence  of  which 
xperience  has  taught  him  ;  and  the  lover  of  natural  philosophy,  in 
eneral  believes  in  all  those   properties  of  matter  and  laws  of  the 
material  world,  of  which  observation  or  credible  testimony  assures 
im ;  but  would  he  be  entitled  to  the  name  of  a  philosopher,  who 
tvith  our  present  scanty  knowledge)   should  pretend  that  he  fully 
imprehended  the  mode  of  operation  and  the  relations  of  any  one 
f  these  principles  or  laws  ?     We  believe  that  God  is  uncreated ; 
ut  how  any  being  could  exist  without  having  at  sometime  or  other 
3gun  to  exist,  who  can  comprehend  ?  Some  of  the  ancient  philoso- 
hers  who  received  not  the  revelation,  have  inculcated  the  omnis- 
ence  of  God  in  very  pleasing  and  explicit  terms.     Seneca  the 
loralist,  in  admonishing  his  fellow  men  not  to  believe  that  they  had 
40 


314  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  IJ, 

escaped  punishment,  because  their  crimes  were  concealed  from  the 
view  of  mortals,  remarks,  *'  nam  ille  in  cujus  conspectu  vivimus  scit 
omnia,  he  in  whose  presence  we  live  (i.  e.  God)  knows  all  things." 
The  same  proposition  is  believed  alike  by  Deist,  by  Unitarian,  and 
by  the  disciple  of  that  glorious  Redeemer  to  whom  his  apostle  said, 
*'  Lord,  thou  knowest  all  things,  thou  knowest  that  1  love  thee.'-' — 
But  is  net  the  mode  of  the  divine  omniscience  equally  incompre- 
hensible to  all  ?  Since,  then,  it  is  a  fact  that  all  men  positively  do 
believe  a  thousand  propositions,  when  they  cannot  comprehend  the 
mode  and  relations  of  the  truths  asserted  in  them  ;  it  necessarily 
follows  that  we  can  do  it :  which  was  the  first  point  to  be  proved. 

Again  :  as  it  will  be  admitted  that  we  are  under  obligation  to  be- 
lieve the  whole  of  a  revelation  which  has  been  proved  divine,  it  fol- 
lows that  it  is  our  duty  to  believe  every  part ;  and  consequently 
those  parts  also  which  contaia  truths  or  propositions,  the  mode  of 
which  or  many  of  the  relations  of  which  are  incomprehensible  to  us; 
and  this  was  the  second  point. 

Finally  :  to  say  that  we  believe  in  a  proposition,  when  we  have 
no  idea  of  the  truth  intended  to  be  affirmed  in  it,  is  an  absurdity  ; 
the  thing  is  impossible,  and  cannot  be  a  duty.  By  belief  in  a  pro- 
position, we  mean  the  judgment  of  the  mind,  that  the  idea  affirmed 
by  the  terms  of  the  proposition  is  true.  Hence,  to  say  that  w^e  be- 
lieve in  a  proposition  which  w^e  do  not  understand,  is  to  say  that  we 
judge  some  particular  idea  to  be  true,  but  we  do  not  know  what 
idea.  For  we  believe,  either  from  evidence  presented  to  our  minds, 
or  upon  the  testimony  of  one  in  whom  we  confide.  We  cannot 
believe  in  an  unintelligible  proposition,  from  its  own  evidence  ;  for 
the  evidence  of  the  truth  of  an  idea  must  be  found  in  its  relations  to 
other  truths  or  principles  which  are  more  evident;  but  if  we  do  not 
even  know  what  the  idea  in  question  is,  much  less  can  we  know  its 
relations.  Hence  it  is  impossible  to  believe  in  an  unintelligible 
proposition,  from  its  own  evidence  ;  for  evidence  unknown  to  the 
mind  can  have  no  influence  in  producing  belief  of  any  kind.  Nor 
is  it  possible  to  believe  in  an  unintelligible  proposition,  on  the  testi- 
mony of  any  being  whatever.  For  it  is  impossible,  by  the  laws  of 
our  mental  nature,  to  judge  that  an  idea  is  true  or  not,  unless  we 
know  what  the  idea  is.  If  an  unintelligible  proposition  were  con- 
tained in  a  divine  revelation,  we  might  express  the  general  judg- 
ment, that,  as  it  is  of  divine  origin,  it  contains  a  truth  which  it  would 
convey  to  a  being  that  could  understand  it,  whatever  that  might  be, 
for  God  cannot  lie.  But  we  could  not  believe  that  any  particular 
idea  is  true,  on  the  authority  of  such  a  proposition,  until  we  knew 
that  it  is  contained  in  it.  Hence  it  is  evident  that  a  belief  in  an 
unintelligible  proposition,  is  a  contradiction  in  terms  and  impossible 


APP.]  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  TRINITY  RATIONAL.  315 

in  the  nature  of  things.  And  as  God  will  not  require  what  he  has 
made  it  impossible  for  us  to  perform,  and  as  he  so  formed  the  hu- 
man mind,  that  we  cannot  believe  what  we  cannot  understand  ; 
therefore  it  is  not  our  duty  to  believe  any  unintelligible  proposition : 
which  was  the  last  point  to  be  proved. 

i  In  reference  to  this  proposition,  it  has  been  alleged  that  Trinitari- 
ans acknowledge  their  inability  to  comprehend  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  and  yet  profess  to  believe  it.  Tliis  objection  also  arises 
from  want  of  precision,  which  may  be  chargeable  perhaps  as  well  to 
some  of  the  orthodox  as  to  their  opponents.  But  it  is  easily  solved, 
the  writer  thinks,  by  an  application  of  the  preceding  remarks.  The 
point  at  issue  is  not  whether  the  few  general  ideas  which  the  scrip- 
tures reveal,  relative  to  the  distinction  in  the  Deity,  are  most  closely 
connected  with  mystery,  whether  they  sustain  relations  which  rea- 
son cannot  discover  and  which  God  has  not  revealed  ;  for  this  is 
granted,  and  it  has  been  proved,  in  the  first  point  of  this  proposition, 
that  this  is  no  bar  to  our  believing  those  truths  which  are  revealed. 
But  the  question  is,  are  those  propositions  relative  to  this  subject, 
which  Trinitarians  profess  to  believe,  unintelligible  ?  Those  who 
differ  from  the  Trinitarians,  seem  to  confound  those  views  of  this 
doctrine  which  are  revealed  in  Scripture  and  are  intelligible,  with 
the  relations  of  those  views  or  truths  and  their  mode  of  subsistence, 
concerning  which  the  holy  volume  is  silent,  and  which  are  unin- 
telligible. The  former  the  Trinitarian  understands  and  believes  ;  it 
i?  the  latter  which  he  cannot  compiehend,  and  these  form  no  article 
of  his  creed,  for  they  are  not  revealed.  It  has  been  evinced  under 
the  second  proposition,  that  the  terms  used  by  Trinitarians  to  con- 
vey the  ideas  they  find  in  the  Scriptures  on  this  subject,  are  abso- 
lutely void  of  all  contradiction.  A  fewremarks  only  need  be  added, 
to  show  that  they  are  intelligible.  Let  it  be  remembered,  then, 
that  belief  (in  its  popular  latitude)  in  a  proposition,  is  the  judgment 
of  the  mind  that  the  particular  idea  predicated  of  the  subject  does 
belong  to  it.  If  that  idea  be  a  generic  one,  the  belief  does  not  re- 
gard its  species,  but  only  the  generic  idea  which  forms  the  predicate 
of  the  proposition.  If  the  idea  predicated  be  specific,  the  judgment 
of  the  mind  of  course  relates  to  the  specific  idea  and  to  no  other.-— 
pThus  when  any  person  believes  the  proposition  "  God  is  omni- 
j  present,"  he  does  not  believe  that  he  is  omnipresent  in  this  or  that 
particular  mode.  And  when  the  Trinitarian  believes  there  is  a 
distinction  in  the  Godhead,  he  does  not  believe  that  it  exists  in  this 
|ior  that  particular  mode.  Thus  also  in  respect  to  the  proposition 
"  God  is  three  in  one  respect,  and  one  in  another  respect,"  which 
.  the  Trinitarian  believes  taught  in  Scripture,  the  terms  are  generic 
tand  abstract,  they  define  nothing  relative  to  the  specific  nature  of 


316  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.   II. 


the  things  indicated  by  them  ;  and  our  belief  of  these  propositions 
can  of  course  not  be  more  specific,  as  it  would  be  a  belief  of  another 
proposition.  And  surely  no  one  will  deny  that  we  have  a  distinct 
idea  and  a  full  understanding  of  the  general  abstract  term  unity,  (it 
is  superfluous  to  add  the  word  numerical,  for,  strictly  speaking, 
there  can  be  no  other  unity,)  and  of  the  general  terms  respect  and 
reference,  and  of  the  general  abstract  term  three.  Consequently, 
we  can  fully  understand  these  propositions  ;  and  our  belief  in  them 
amounts  to  this,  that  we  believe  them  to  be  justly  predicated  of  the 
divine  Being  :  and  hence  of  course  they  must  be  intelligible. 

It  were  an  easy  matter,  by  admitting  such  confusion  and  want  of 
precision,  as  are  sometimes  manifested  in  treating  of  the  Trinity,  to 
involve  some  of  those  doctrines  relative  to  God  which  are  univer- 
sally believed,  in  equal  if  not  greater  contradiction.  To  the  Deist 
we  might  then  propose  such  reasoning  as  this  :  "  You  admit  that 
God  is  here  present  in  this  house,  not  a  part  of  God,  but  every 
thing  of  which  God  consists.  But  if  every  thing  of  which  God 
consists  is  now  in  this  house,  it  cannot  be  out  of  it ;  for  it  is  im- 
possible for  the  whole  of  the  same  thing  to  be  at  two  diflferent 
places  at  the  same  time,  or  it  is  impossible  for  the  same  thing  to  be 
and  not  to  be  at  the  san)e  time.  Therefore,  if  every  thing  of  which 
God  consists,  be  now  in  this  house,  it  cannot  be  out  of  it,  i.  e.  it 
cannot  be  any  where  else,  much  less  every  where  else,  at  the  same 
time."  But  to  this  we  should  jointly  reply,  that  our  belief  does  not 
include  the  specific  nature  and  mode  of  the  divine  omnipresence  ; 
and  as  the  objection  rests  on  the  supposition  that  it  must  be  like  the 
presence  of  men  etc.  which  is  gratuitous,  it  falls  to  the  ground.  Yet 
precisely  of  this  nature  are  some  of  the  reasonings  with  which  the 
Orthodox  are  sometimes  pressed,  and  there  is  not  even  an  equal 
ground  for  it.  To  be  placed  on  a  perfect  equality,  the  proposition 
must  stand  thus :  "  God  is  present  in  this  house  in  one  respect,  and 
at  the  same  instant  present  in  every  other  part  of  the  universe  in 
another  respect."  In  this  form  it  would  not  wear  so  much  the  as- 
pect of  contradiction,  as  in  the  form  in  which  it  is  believed  by  all, 
Trinitarians  and  others ;  and  in  this  unobjectionable  form,  it  is 
exactly  analogous  to  the  Trinitarian  proposition,  "  God  is  one  in  one 
respect,  and  at  the  same  time  three  in  another  respect."  But  even 
if  the  Trinitarian  proposition  were  stated  tlius,  "  God  is  one  and 
three  in  the  same  respect  at  the  same  time,"  it  would  not  be  any 
more  objectionable  than  the  proposition,  "  the  same  one  God  (not  a 
part  of  him)  is  now  here  present,  and  at  the  same  time,  in  the  same 
sense,  present  in  every  other  place  in  the  universe."  For  the  ideas 
one  and  three  are  no  more  subversive  of  one  another,  than  the  ideas 
of  the  proposition,  "  it  is  possible  for  the  whole  of  the  same  thing  to 


APP.]  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  TRINITY  RATIONAL.  317 

be  at  two  or  a  million  different  and  remote  places  at  the  same  time." 
If  it  be  replied,  that  spirits  have  no  relation  to  space  ;  this  is  a  gra- 
tuitous assumption,  and  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  conceive  of  a  spirit 
except  as  existing  in  some  place  or  other.  And  if  this  principle 
may  be  assumed,  v^^e  may  with  equal  propriety  assume  another,  that 
spirits  have  no  relation  to  number  ;  although  we  cannot  conceive  of 
them  except  as  one  or  more.  And  then,  as  God  is  a  spirit,  (the 
mode  of  his  subsistence)  the  distinction  in  him  has  no  relation  to 
number;  and  if  no  argument  can  be  drawn  from  space  against  his 
omnipresence,  then  also  none  can  be  derived  from  number  against 
the  (personal)  distinction  in  God.  For  there  is  no  more  contradic- 
tion between  spirit  and  number,  than  between  spirit  and  space  ;  and 
it  is  equally  impossible,  with  our  present  constitution  of  mind,  to 
think  of  spirits  excepting  as  connected  with  space  and  number. — 
From  these  considerations,  we  should  learn  the  importance  of  pre- 
cision, when  speaking  or  thinking  on  the  subject  of  the  divine  na- 
ture ;  we  should  learn  humility,  from  the  manifest  imbecility  of  the 
human  mind  ;  and  should  be  wrapped  up  in  adoration  of  that  God 
whom  none  by  searching  can  find  out  to  perfection. 

Prop.  6.  Doctrines  which  are  above  reason,  could  never  be  proved 
contrary  to  reason^  even  on  the  supposition  that  they  were  so. 

It  is  a  position  which  is  admitted  by  logicians,  and  cannot  be  de- 
nied by  any  person  habituated  to  close  thought,  that  before  we  can 
establish  the  falsity  or  absurdity  of  a  proposition,  we  must  under- 
stand not  only  the  terms  in  which  it  is  couched,  but  also  those  in- 
ternal modes  and  relations  of  the  subject  and  predicate,  on  which 
the  supposed  absurdity  depends.  Thus,  if  we  say,  "  a  circle  is  a 
square,"  we  immediately  perceive  the  impossibility  of  its  truth,  be- 
cause we  are  extremely  familiar  with  those  circumstances  and  rela- 
tions (not  all)  of  these  figures  on  which  the  absurdity  depends.  But 
should  we  inquire  of  a  person  totally  unacquainted  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  hydrostatics  and  ignorant  of  the  fact  in  question,  which  of 
the  two  propositions  is  absurd,  "that  water  will  rise  thirty  two  feet 
in  a  tube  emptied  of  air,  the  one  end  being  closed  and  the  other 
open  and  inserted  into  a  tub  of  water ;  or,  that  it  will  not ;"  he 
would  be  at  loss  to  know  which  is  the  true  proposition,  much  more 
to  prove  either  absurd  or  contrary  to  reason.  It  were  easy  to 
illustrate  the  truth  of  this  proposition  by  copious  exemplification. — 
Let  a  few  instances  suffice.  Should  we  say  to  a  person  unacquain- 
ted with  optics,  that  the  mind  does  not  derive  its  perceptions  of  ex- 
ternal objects  of  vision  immediately  from  the  objects  themselves, 
but  from  the  image  of  them  formed  on  the  retina  of  the  eye,  by  the 
rays  of  light  passing  from  the  object  through  the  pupil,  and  that  the 


318  THE  TRINITY.  [bK.  II. 

image  is  inverted ;  he  would  be  equally  unable  to  prove  it  either 
accordant  with  reason  or  contrary  to  it.  Or  should  we  say  to  one 
ignorant  of  acoustics,  that  sound,  for  example  in  the  explosion  of 
a  musket,  is  not  near  the  musket,  but  in  the  mind  of  him  that  hears 
it ;  or  that  those  unpleasant  perceptions  which  are  called  discords 
in  music,  are  occasioned  by  the  irregular  and  confused  vibrations  of 
the  air,  striking  the  tympanum  or  drum  of  the  ear  ;  he  could 
neither  prove  the  assertion  true  nor  false,  much  less  absurd.  In  the 
same  manner,  were  I  to  assert  that  the  modus  operandi  of  the  mag- 
netic attraction  would,  if  known,  fully  explain  the  intrinsic  nature 
and  mode  of  operation  of  the  attraction  of  gravitation;  it  would  be 
as  impossible  for  any  man  to  prove  the  proposition  false,  as  for  me 
to  prove  it  true.  But,  should  God  reveal  that  proposition  to  us,  it 
would  not  appear  contradictory  to  us,  nor  could  we  prove  it  so : 
and  the  reason  is,  because  we  are  ignorant  of  the  intrinsic  nature 
and  mode  of  operation  of  both,  on  which  its  contradiction  would 
depend.  From  all  this  it  is  evident,  that  before  we  can  prove  a 
proposition  false  or  absurd,  we  must  be  able  to  understand  not  only 
the  terms  of  the  proposition,  (for  these  are  understood  in  all  the 
above  examples,)  but  also  those  relations  and  the  intrinsic  nature  of 
the  subject  and  predicate  on  which  the  supposed  absurdity  would 
depend..  And  consequently,  as  these  are  wholly  unknown  in  the 
Trinitarian  propositions,  those  propositions  can  never  be  proved 
contrary  to  reason,  even  if  they  were  so. 

Prop.  7.  But  ive  know,  that  doctrines  of  a  divine  revelation  the 
mode  and  relations  ofivhich  are  totally  incomprehensible,  i.  e.  those 
commonly  said  to  be  above  reason,  cannot  possibly  be  contrary  to 
reason. 

It  will  be  admitted,  that  God  is  not  man  that  he  should  lie. 
Hence  when  a  revelation  has  been  proved  to  be  of  divine  origin,  we 
know  that  all  the  doctrines  taught  in  it  are  true ;  and  consequently, 
those  also  the  mode  and  relations  of  which  are  totally  incomprehen- 
sible. 

And  it  will  be  granted,  that  all  the  comprehensible  relations  of  re- 
vealed doctrines,  are  perfectly  accordant  with  those  principles  and 
propositions  which  the  constitution  of  our  mental  nature  compels  us 
to  believe,  and  which  we  call  truths,  i.  e.  accordant  with  our  reason. 
Hence,  as  no  evidence  to  the  contrary  can  be  produced,  we  are  au- 
thorized to  believe,  that  the  intrinsic  nature  and  those  relations  of  a 
revealed  truth,  which  are  incomprehensible  to  us,  that  is,  those 
which  are  said  to  be  above  reason,  must  also  be  accordant  with  the 
legitimate  dictates  of  our  mental  constitution,  i.  e.  with  our  reason. 

Moreover,  it  will  be  admitted  that  truth  must  ever  be  consistent 


APP.]  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  TRINITY  RATIONAL.  319 

with  itself.  Hence,  if  some  of  the  relations  of  a  divine  truth  were 
contrary  to  our  reason,  all  the  relations  of  that  truth  must  be  so  ;  and 
vice  versa,  if  some  of  the  relations  of  a  divine  truth  accord  with  our 
reason,  the  other  relations  of  that  truth  must  also  do  so.  But  it 
must  be  admitted,  that  the  comprehensible  relations  of  those  reveal- 
ed truths,  the  mode  and  some  of  the  relations  of  which  are  incom- 
prehensible, accord  perfectly  with  the  dictates  of  our  reason  ;  hence 
it  follows  that  the  others  must  necessarily  do  so  also,  or  they  would 
contradict  themselves. 

Finally  ;  this  proposition  may  also  be  proved  by  a  reductio  ad 
absurdum.  It  is  admitted  that  the  dictates  of  reason  are  those  pro- 
positions which  the  mental  constitution  of  all  men  compels  them  to 
believe,  that  we  are  compelled  to  regard  these  as  truths  and  their 
opposite  as  falsehoods.  Now,  if  we  suppose  that  some  of  the  unre- 
vealed  relations  of  a  divine  truth  are  contrary  to  these  propositions, 
it  follows  that  we  are  compiled  by  our  mental  nature  to  believe  them 
falsehoods ;  or  if  we  suppose  that  those  relations  of  the  truth  in 
question  which  are  contrary  to  our  reason,  are  true,  it  follows,  that 
the  others  which  accord  with  our  mental  structure,  are  false,  and 
consequently  that  God  so  formed  our  mental  nature  that  we  are 
compelled  to  believe  a  lie ;  which  is  absurd  :  therefore,  we  know 
that  those  relations  of  a  revealed  truth  which  are  incomprehensible 
to  reason,  cannot  be  contrary  to  reason. 


BOOK    III. 


OF    CREATED    RATIONAL    BEINGS. 


PART  I. 


OF    THE    ANGELS. 


^  47.      Connexion  between  the  subject  of  this  chapter  and   the 
doctrine  of  Creation  and  Providence. 

As  the  doctrine  of  the  creation  and  providence  of  God  in  general, 
has  been  discussed  in  the  preceding  chapter  ;  the  consideration  of 
the  origin  and  divine  government  of  the  human  family  vs^ould  now 
naturally  succeed,  as  a  specific  part  of  that  doctrine.  But,  as 
among  the  rational  creatures  of  the  universe,  for  whose  sake  God 
created  and  governs  the  world,  there  are  some  of  a  rank  superior  to 
that  of  man  (<§>  48,)  creatures  who  sustain  certain  relations  to  the 
human  family,  of  whose  instrumentahty  God  avails  himself  in  his 
providential  guidance  of  the  destinies  of  men,  and  with  whom  we 
expect  in  a  future  world  to  be  brought  into  closer  connexion  ;  it  is 
proper  that  the  consideration  of  these  should  previously  engage  our 
attention. 


SECTION   XLVIII. 

r  The  existence  and  attributes  of  angels. 

■      From  the  volume  of  inspiration  we  learn,  that  in  addition  to  man 
there  exists(l)  in  the  universe  a  vast  multitude(2)  of  other  rational 
creatures.     These  beings  are  elevated  above  the  human  family  in 
41 


322  OF  ANGELS.  [bK.  III. 


point  of  intelligence,  of  power,(3)  of  moral  excel]ence,(4)  and  of 
happiness. (5)  And  the  superiority(6)  which  they  possess,  is  de- 
rived partly  from  the  powers  which  were  originally  bestowed  on  them 
by  the  Creator,  and  partly  from  the  high  degree  of  improvement 
which  a  conscientious  and  long  continued  use  of  their  faculties  has 
enabled  them  to  attain. 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  existence  of  angels  is  taught  in  Matt.  22:  30,  for  in  the 
resurrection  they  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  but  are  as 
the  angels  of  God.  The  force  of  this  passage  cannot  be  eluded  by 
taking  refuge  in  the  hypothesis  which  was  refuted  in  the  previous 
volume  (^  13,)  that  Christ  mingled  with  his  instructions  the  errone- 
ous opinions  of  those  to  whom  they  were  addressed.  For  he  was 
speaking  with  Sadducees,  who,  according  to  Acts  23:  8,  did  not  be- 
lieve in  the  existence  of  angels.  It  is  evident,  on  the  contrary, 
that  he  rectifies  their  disbeliefofangels,  with  the  same  sincerity  which 
he  manifested  (v.  29)  in  purifying  their  notions  relative  to  the  state 
of  the  dead  and  the  occupations  in  which  they  are  engaged. 

II.  That  they  are  very  numerous,  is  evident  from  Matt:  26:  53, 
more  than  twelve  legions  of  angels  ;  and  Luke  2:  13,  multitude  of 
the  heavenly  host  or  angels  ;  and  Heb.  12:  22,  23,  myriads  of  an- 
gels. It  is  probable  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  among  so 
great  a  multitude  of  angels  there  would  be  different  grades  or  classes ; 
and  the  expression  a^/ft//^Aog  (archangel  or  chief-angel)  contains 
an  explicit  allusion  to  such  a  diversity.  1  Thess.  4:  16.  Jude  9. 

III.  That  angels  possess  superhuman  intelligence,  is  implied  in 
the  passage,  "  But  of  that  day  and  hour  knoweth  no  man,  not  even 
the  angels  in  heaven."^  Great  power  \^  ascribed  to  them,  *'^it' 
ayytX(x)v  dvvdfUMg  uvxou  with  his  mighty  angels."^  In  the  Disserta- 
tion on  several  passages  of  the  minor  epistles  of  Paul,^  it  is  main- 
tained that  these  latter  words  cannot  be  translated  "  angelic  host,^^ 
with  Koppe  and  Schleusner  ;  making  duvauig  [power]  equivalent  to 

GTQUTLo,  [host  or  soldiery]  and  i\^:i,  [host;]  for  in  that  case  the 
word  dvvafA60}g  must  necessarily  be  before  ayyt'Xwv.  The  pronoun 
avTOv  [his]  belongs  to  ayytlodv  [angels,]  and  not  to  dwa^ifojg  [pow- 
€r ;]  as  in  Heb.  1:  3,  in  the  words  tm  grifiazt,  lijg  dWa^tfcog  avzov 
by  his  pow%3rful  word.  Tins  point  is  illustrated  from  the  usage  of 
the  Hebrew,  in  the  Observv.  ad  anal,  et  syntax.  Ebraicam,  p.  234. 
Ps.  103:  20,  ro  ■'n'six  T^^^'rtt  nirr:  ^D-i:2  bless  Jehovah,  ye  his 
angels,  powerful  in  strength;    compare  2  Pet.  2:  11,  ayyeXot  ioxvi 

1  Mark  13:  32.  2  2  Thess.  1:7.  3  Note  120. 


^  48.]        EXISTENCE  AND  ATTRIBUTES  OF  ANGELS.        323 

xai  duva/iiei  fi6i^ov6g  otreg  angels  who  are  greater  in  power  and 
might. 

IV.  Their  moral  perfection. — ''  The  holy  angels  ;"^  and  "  elect 
angels."^ 

V.  Their  felicity. — The  blessed  in  the  future  world  are  said  to 
be  wayyeloi  y.al  viol  tov  'diov  i.  e.  they  are  like  unto  the  angels 
and  are  sons  of  God.^  And  in  Heb.  12:  23,  Paul  says,  ixulrjaia 
ngonoTOxoji/,  ajioyeygafiinii^oov  tv  ovgavolg  the  congregation  of  the 
first  born  who  are  recorded  in  heaven.^ 

VI.  Their  superiority  to  men  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the 
close  and  immediate  connexion  which  they  sustain  to  God.  "  The 
angels  always  behold  the  face  of  my  Father."^ 


SECTION    XLIX. 

Angels  are  employed  by  God^  as  the  ministers  ofhistvilL 

It  is  evident,  even  from  the  name(I)  by  which  these  spirits  are 
designated  in  Scripture,  that  God  employs  their  agency  in  the  dis- 
pensations of  his  providence. (2)  And  it  is  further  evident  from  cer- 
tain actions  which  are  ascribed  wholly  to  them, (3)  and  from  the 
Scriptural  narratives  of  other  events  in  the  accomplishment  of  which 
they  acted  a  visible  part, (4)  that  their  agency  is  employed  princi- 
pally in  the  guidance  of  the  destinies  of  man. (5)  In  those  cases, 
also,  in  which  their  agency  is  concealed  from  our  view,  we  ought 
still  to  admit  the  possibility  of  its  existence  ;(6)  because  Scripture 
teaches  us  the  general  truth,  that  God  sends  them  forth  ''  to  minister 
unto  them  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation. "(7)  This  fact  is  suffi- 
cient to  afford  us  consolation,  and  to  determine  the  reciprocal  duties 
to  which  we  are  obligated  ;  neither  is  it  necessary  that  we  should 
be  able  to  ascertain  which  are  the  individual  blessings  that  flow  to 
us  through  this  channel.  It  is  enough  for  us  to  know  that  God  is 
not  confined  to  the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  but  can  also  bestow 
his  blessings  to  us  in  other  ways.  And  it  is  important  that  we 
should  view  the  ministry  of  angels,  as  one  of  the  means  which  God 

1  Luke  9:  26.  2  l  Tim.  5:  21.  3  Luke  20:  36. 

■*  See  Storr's  Comment,  in  loc.  notes  t  and  u.  5  Matt.  18:  10. 


324  OF    ANGELS.  [bK.   III. 


can  employ  for  the  promotion  of  our  welfare. (8)  But  let  it  be 
remembered  that  the  angels  when  employed  for  our  welfare,  do  not 
act  independently,  but  as  the  instruments  of  God  and  by  divine 
command. (9)  Not  unto  them,  therefore,  are  our  confidence  and 
adoration  due;  but  only  unto  hira(lO)  whom  the  angels  reverently 
serve  (Ps.  103:  20,)  even  whilst  they  are  benefitting  us,  and  to 
whom  we  are  indebted  for  every  blessing  which  we  receive,  wheth- 
er it  is  communicated  to  us  through  the  ministry  of  angels,  or  in 
any  other  manner. 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  name  angel — In  Ps.  104:  4,  the  terms  n-nn'i^^  and 
D"':dJ<V73  ,  ayytlov  and  Utrovgyov  [angels  and  ministers,]  correspond 
to  each  other;  and  accordingly,  in  Heb.  1:  14  angels  are  called 
nvevfAuicc  XeiTOvgytxa  ministering  spirits. 

II.  Thtir  agency. — Ps.  103:  20,  iisn  r^i>  '^''^A'^'^  ^^'^  angels 
who  do  his  commandment.  Ps.  104:  4,  "i^nWr?;:  nimV  vrDJjbTS  nu:y 
tinV  "iJN  he  employs  his  angels  like  winds  and  his  ministers  like 
flaming  fire.  It  is  evident  from  grammatical  considerations,  that, 
in  the  latter  of  these  passages,  angels  are  meant.  In  the  Commen- 
tary on  the  Hebrews,^  these  words  are  rendered  thus  :  "  He  em- 
ploys his  angels  like  winds,  and  his  ministers  like  lightning."  But 
if  the  idea  of  the  passage  were  intended  to  be  this,  "  He  employs 
the  winds  as  his  messengers,"  the  word  nimn  [winds]  must 
have  been  before  T'DNb^Q  [his  angels  ;]  just  as  in  the  third  verse 
l:"'ny  precedes,  in  the  sentence  iDTD-j  cny  c^ijn  he  uses  the  clouds 
as  his  chariot.  Moreover,  it  ought  to  be  in"!u;72  instead  of  T'nn'^7q  , 
in  the  hemistich  "  he  makes  the  flaming  fire  his  minister  or  servant." 
With  this  interpretation  the  context  fully  accords.  For  it  was  not 
the  object  of  the  writer  of  this  psalm,  to  give  a  general  description 
of  the  visible  works  of  creation,  and  to  begin  with  a  representation 
of  heaven.  On  the  contrary,  this  psalm  rather  contains  a  delinea- 
tion of  the  providence  of  God  in  special  relation  to  this  earth,  be- 
ginning with  the  5th  verse.^  To  this  description  is  prefixed  a  short 
song  of  praise  in  celebration  of  the  greatness  and  glory*^  of  our  Lord 
and  Benefactor ;  just  as  in  the  103d  Psalm,  an  ode  in  commemora- 
tion of  the  greatness'^  of  God  is  appended  to  the  description  of  the 
divine  goodness.^  But  the  mention  of  the  angels  is  quite  as  appro- 
priate in  the  celebration  of  the  greatness  of  God,  as  are  the  contents 
of  the  2d  and  3d  verses  (compare  Is.  40:  22.  Ps.  68:  34.)  Thus 
also  are  the  anoels  mentioned  in  the  descriptions  of  the  divine  great- 
ness, in  Ps.  103:  20.  1  K.  22:  29.  Dan.  7:  10. 

1  Chan.  1:  r.  Note  v.      a  v.  5.  21.  30.       3  v.  1—4.      4  y.  19.      5  v.  1  etc. 


«5>  49.]  AGENCY  OF  ANGELS.  325 


III.  Their  agency  continued, — "Lazarus  was  borne  by  angels 
to  Abraham's  bosom. "^  In  the  "  Dissertation  concerning  the  para- 
bles of  Christ,"  it  is  remarked  that  this  supplement,  which  relates 
to  the  truth  that  angels  attend  the  righteous,  cannot  be  regarded  as 
a  necessary  part  of  the  external  dress  of  the  parable,  inasmuch  as  it 
would  be  wholly  superfluous,  if  it  were  not  intended  to  convey  some 
truth.  In  Matt.  13:  41,  49,  the  separation  of  the  wicked  from  the 
righteous,  is  ascribed  to  the  angels ;  and  in  like  manner  the  collec- 
tion of  the  elect,  in  ch.  24:  31. 

IV.  Angelic  agency  continued. — An  angel  conducted  the 
apostles  out  of  prison.     Acts  5:  19,  20. 

An  angel  delivered  Peter  from  prison.  Acts  12:  7  etc. 

An  angel  informed  the  apostle  Paul,  that  he  and  his  companions 
should  not  be  lost  in  their  voyage  to  Rome.  Acts  27:  23  etc. 

An  angel  advised  the  pious  Cornelius  to  send  for  Peter.  Acts 
10:  3  etc. 

An  angel  appeared  to  Zacharias,  the  priest.    Luke  1:11  etc. 

The  angel  Gabriel  was  sent  to  Mary.     Luke  2:  9  etc. 

Angels  appeared  at  the  birth  of  Jesus.     Luke  2:  9  etc. 

V.  Angelic  agency  continued. — Just  as  activity  is  necessary  to 
spiritual  beings  and  the  exercise  of  it  promotes  their  happiness;  just 
as  exercise  in  the  discharge  of  their  duty  is  a  means  to  promote  the 
intellectual  and  moral  improvement  of  rational  creatures  ;  so  also 
do  the  angels  derive  various  advantages  from  being  employed  as 
instruments  in  the  hand  of  God,  and  especially  from  their  agency  in 
the  guidance  of  the  destinies  of  men.  Ephes.  3:  10.  1  Pet.  1:  12. 
Luke  15:  10.  The  importance  of  this  remark  in  enabling  us  to 
appreciate  the  practical  moment  of  the  doctrine  concerning  angels, 
is  proved  in  the  "  Dissertation  on  the  object  of  Christ's  deatli  ;'^ 
where  it  is  shown,  that  the  plan  of  redemption  of  the  world  by 
Christ,  was  a  powerful  means  to  strengthen  in  the  inhabitants  of  the 
world  of  spirits,  their  conviction  of  the  dependance  on  God,  and 
grateful  sense  of  the  blessings  for  which  they  were  indebted  to  him. 
It  is  also  remarked  in  the  same  work,^  that  the  influence  which  the 
plan  of  redemption  exerts  on  the  good  and  bad  angels,  may  pos- 
sibly be  the  cause  why  the  doctrine  of  angels,  which  is  so  seldom 
touched  on  in  the  Old  Testament,  is  taught  much  more  amply  in 
the  New. 

VI.  Morus  In  his  Theolog.  Christ.'*^  maintains,  that  it  is  perfect- 
ly consonant  with  the  character  of  God  to  employ  the  instrumentality 
of  angels  in  the  government  of  the  world. 

Vil.  The  ministry  of  angels.— Mm.  18:  10.  Ps.  34:  8.  91: 
11,  12,  compare  Heb.  1:  14.^*   Ministering  spirits,  sent  for  the  ser- 

1  Lukel6r22r  2  p.  632.  3  Pt.  II.  §  2—4.  §^^  ~       ^ 

^  See  note  m.  in  Comm.  in  loc. 


326  ^ OF  ANGELS.  [bK,  III. 


vice  of  those  who  shall  inherit  salvation.  Agreeably  to  Heb.  12: 
S3,  also,  Christians,  who  are  sons  of  God,  stand  in  connexion  with 
the  celestial  family  of  God's  elder  sons,  that  is  with  angels.^ 

VIII.  Importance  of  this  doctrine. — See  <§>  35.  II.  4.  The 
observations  which  have  been  made  in  <§>  49.  II.  3 — 6,  afford  a 
satisfactory  reply  to  the  objection  urged  against  the  utility  of  the 
doctrine  of  good  angels,  in  Henke's  Magazine  for  religious  philoso- 
phy.^ His  w^ords  are  "  Every  pretended  advantage  which  is  said  to 
be  derivable  from  a  lively  impression  of  the  presence  and  agency 
of  angels,  must  be  detrimental  to  the  far  more  exalted  idea  of  an 
omnipresent,  universal  Spirit.  And  if  angels  were  beings  of  whom 
we  could  form  an  idea  more  easily  than  we  can  of  an  infinitely  per- 
fect Spirit  ;  we  should  have  been  made  better  acquainted  with  their 
nature,  their  employment,  and  more  particularly  with  their  partici- 
pation or  cooperation  in  the  incidents  of  our  lives." 

IX.  Angels  are  only  instruments  in  the  hands  of  God. — Ps. 
103:  20,  ye  his  angels  who  execute  his  commands.  104:  4.  Heb. 
1:  13,  14,  the  angels  are  not  appointed  to  sit  upon  the  throne 
of  God,  but  to  await  the  commands  of  God  which  proceed  from  his 
throne. 

X.  Angels  not  to  he  uwrshipped. — Rev.  19:  10.  22:  9.  In 
both  these  cases,  the  angel  before  whom  John  prostrated  himself, 
said  to  him  oqu  fxri'  ngonxuvrjGov  tw  x>£w,  i.  e.  do  it  not ;  worship 
God.  In  the  New  Apology  for  the  Revelation,  it  is  moreover  re- 
marked,^ that  in  neither  of  these  cases  is  actual  worship  intended  ; 
for  John  knew  the  being  before  whom  he  prostrated  himself,  to  be 
an  angel,  and  only  intended  in  a  reverent  manner  to  acknowledge 
his  gratitude  ;  but  the  angel  replied  ^'  not  unto  me,  but  unto  God 
give  thanks."     Paul  also  forbids  the  worship  of  angels,  d^grjoatluv 


SECTION    L. 

Of  the  wicked  angels. 

A  part  of  the  angels,(l)  being  led  on(2)  by  one  of  their  number 
called  Devil  or  Satan, (3)  sinned  against  God. (4)  By  this  disobe- 
dience   they  lost   their   original   innocence,  forfeited    their   former 

1  Coram*  on  Heb.  note  f.  in  loc. 

2  Vol.  I.  No.  3.  p.  447.    "  Examination  of  the  doctrine  concerning  angels.' 

3  p.  388.        4  17:  1.  21:  9.  5  Col.  2:  18,  19. 


i 


^  50»]  OF  THE  WICKED  AN(?ELS.  327 

happiness,(5)  and  drew  down  everlasting  punishment  upon  them- 
selves.(6)  They  are  now  suffering  a  portion  of  this  punishment. — • 
For  the  endurance  of  the  remainder  they  are  "  reserved  in  chains 
of  darkness."(7) 

Illustrations. 

I.  As  the  wicked  angels  still  belong  to  the  class  of  angels,  they 
retain  this  name  even  after  their  fall.  Matt.  25:  41.  2  Pet.  2:4. 
Jude  V.  6. 

TI.  They  are  called  his  [the  devil's]  angels,  ciyyelov  amov^  be- 
cause they  suffered  Satan  to  alienate  them  from  God,  and  as  they 
still  continue  in  his  interest. 

Thus  also  were  the  good  angels  who  were  engaged  for  the  angel 
Michael,  termed  "  his  angels,"-  ayytXoL  ylTTOT. 

III.  In  Matt.  25:  48,  we  find  the  name  did^okog  devil,  and  in 
Kev.  9:  7,  dia^oXog  aal  accTuvug  devil  and  Satan.  There  is  but  one 
who  bears  this  name  ;  for  by  the  words  "  Satan  casteth  out  Satan,"^ 
is  not  meant  that  there  are  two  Satans  ;  but  the  latter  word  Satan 
[aajuvav]  is  equivalent  to  LavxQv  himself;  and  in  Mark  3:  26  and 
Luke  II:  18,  the  word  himself  \s  actually  used. 

IV.  I  John  3:  8,  the  devil  sinned  from  the  beginning.  2  Pet. 
1:  4,  angels  that  sinned. 

V.  John  8:  44,  if  uXtj&elcc  ovv.  lOTtjy.s  (the  devil)  abode  not  \u 
the  truth. 

He  and  his  angels  were,  prior  to  their  fall,  celestial  spirits, 
Tivevfuaitud  h>  jo7g  inovgavloig  Eph.  6:  12.  In  the  Dissertation  de 
sensu  vocis  Trkrjgwfia,  these  words  are  rendered  thus,  "  qui  coelestes 
fuerunt."  They  were  then  pure  and  happy  spirits,  as  the  other 
spirits  still  are  ;  for  concerning  these  it  is  said,  in  Eph.  3:  10.  Matt. 
18:  10.  22:  30,  that  they  are  fV  xolg  iuovgavioig,  Iv  rolg  ovguvaig^ 
Iv  ovgavM,  in  the  heavens  etc.  And  in  Jude  v.  6,  we  read  that 
they  maintained  not  their  former  state  or  power  or  dominion, 
uyytXoo  ixri  rtigriaavTiq  trjv  iaviojv  cigyrjp.  In  the  same  sense  is  ocgxv 
^tised  by  the  LXX,  in  Gen.  40:  13,  20,  21.  4:  13. 

VI.  Everlasting  fire,  everlasting  misery.  Matt.  25:41,46. 
com  p.  <§>  58.  The  punishment  which  is  denounced  upon  the  ser- 
pent, in  Gen.  4:  14,  is  eternal,^  '^^■'■^n  -i??.:  bs  i.  e.  all  the  days  of  thy 
life.  Jude  v.  6,  dtofAoTg  aidloig  vno  Coqiov  rexrigriKiv  dyytlovg  he 
reserved  the  angels  in  everlasting  chains,  in  darkness. 

VII.  The  future  punishment  of  the  wicked  angels. — 2  Pet.  2: 


I  Matt.  25:  41.        2  Rev.  12:  7.  3  Matt.  12:  26.  Mark  3:  23. 

4  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  431. 


328  OF  ANGELS.  [bK.  III. 

4.  Jude  V.  6,  iiS  xQiatv  (ftfydXijg  rifxtgag)  TrigoviJievot,  reserved  to 
the  judgment  of  the  great  day.  James  2:  19,  ra  daifxovtcc  cpQiaaovai, 
the  evil  spirits  [devils]  tremble.  Rev.  20:  10,  ^aaaviO'&rjaoviu* 
iig  zovg  alwvag  tmv  aicivoiv  they  shall  be  tormented  through  all 
eternity. 


SECTION   LI. 

The  relation  in  which  Satan  stands  io  the  human  family, 

Satan  seduced  our  first  parents  to  sin,(l)  and  still  continues  to 
harbour  a  hostile  disposition  to  the  human  family. (2)  This  dispo- 
sition urges  him,  together  with  his  angels,(3)  to  exert  himself  for 
the  promotion(4)  of  sin  and  misery  among  men. (5)  He  regards 
the  welfare  of  men  as  disgraceful  to  himself  and  inimical  to  the  pur- 
poses which  he  has  in  view,^and  beholds  it  with  feelings  of  dissatis- 
faction and  pain. (6) 

Illustrations. 

I.  John  8:  44,  dt/d^gcanoxTOvog  i]p  dn  ctgxrjg — (pevatfjg  xat  d 
nairig  aviov  (ipevd'ovgy)  he  was  a  murderer  (a  homicide)  from  the 
beginning — a  liar  and  the  father  of  lies.  That  these  words  are  an 
allusion  to  the  history  of  the  fall  (Gen.  3,)  is  proved  in  the  Com- 
mentalio  de  Protevangelio.  For  the  declaration  of  Jesus  that  the 
devil  is  a  murderer,  is  not  applicable  to  any  incident  excepting  the 
history  of  the  fall  recorded  in  Gen.  3,  and  this  may  be  believed 
with  the  greatest  certainty,  as  we  may  infer  from  the  passage,^  in 
the  book  of  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  "  q&6v(a  dca^olov  {^dvarog 
iigrjlx^ev  fig  tov  xooiaov,  t!  rough  the  envy  of  the  devil,  death  enter- 
ed the  world,"  that  according  to  the  prevalent  opinion  of  the  Jews, 
the  devil  was  regarded  as  the  cause  of  the  mortality  of  man. 

II.  Satan  is  hostile  to  the  interests  of  man.  Matt.  13:  39.  2 
Cor.  2:  11.  Eph.  6:  11.  Rev.  12:  10. 

III.  We  have  to  contend  with  the  wicked  spirits.     Eph.  6:  12. 

IV.  Pernicious  influence  of  the  devil. — Luke  22:  31.  John  13: 
2,  27.  Acts  5:  3.  Ephes.  2:  2,  the  spirit  that  now  worketh  in  the 
sons  of  disobedience.  Eph.  6:  11 — 13,  the  wiles  or  stratagems  of 
the  devil.     Thus,  in  Matt.  4:  3,  the  devil  is  called  6  neigd^cov  i.  e. 


1  Chap.  2:  23. 


^  51.]  DEMONIACAL  POSSESSIONS.  329 

lie  who  is  in  the  habit  of  seducing  to  sin.  Acts  26:  ]8,  imoTgiipat 
ano  Tfjg  iiovoiug  tov  Uaxava  im  xdv-Oiov  to  turn  from  the  power  of 
Satan  unto  God  ;  and  Heb.  2:  14,  tov  to  Kgaiog  Ixovia  rov  '&ava- 
Tov,  TovTtGTt,  TOV  dtu^oXov  him  who  has  the  power  of  death,  that  is 
the  devil,  i.  q.  "the  devil  who  wishes  to  plunge  men  into  sin,  and 
by  sin  into  death,  or  the  punishments  inflicted  by  God  after  death," 
Rev,  12:  9.  20:  3,  8,  Satan  who  leadeth  astray  the  whole  world. 

V.  While  Satan  is  laboring  to  promote  iniquity  among  men, 
his  object  is  none  other  than  to  make  them  partakers  of  that  misery 
and  punishment  which  he  himself  is  doomed  to  endure.  See  Matt. 
25:  41.  13:  38  etc.  "sons  of  the  wicked  one,"  in  opposition  to 
"  sons  of  the  kingdom."  Compare  v.  42;  and  Rev.  20:  10,  15. 
Comment,  de  Protevangelio,  in  Opuscul.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  429  etc. 
\  VI.  Demoniacal  possesions — their  reality.  John  16:  11,  ap- 
XO)v  TOO  xoofiov  TovTov  xtxQtiat  the  prince  of  this  world  is  judged. 
John  12:  31,  vuv—ix^ktjt^i^aeTcfi,  f'^w  and  now  he  shall  be  cast  out 
i.  e.  "  now  mankind  shall  be  delivered  from  the  tyranical  power  of 
the  devil."^     Col.  2:  15.  Gen.  3:  15.  Heb.  2:  14.^ 

Jesus  said  to  the  Pharisees,  "  If  I,  by  divine  power,  expel  de- 
mons, it  is  evident  from  this  proof  of  my  superior  power  over  Satan, 
that  the  kingdom  of  God  has  come,  or  that  the  powerful  descendant 
of  David  has  appeared,  by  whom  the  long  promised  victory  over 
Satan  is  to  be  achieved."^  And  in  order  to  give  to  thedevil'shos- 
tility  to  man  an  ocular  perceptibility,  and  to  place  in  a  clear  light 
the  salutary  influence  of  Jesus,  in  defeating  the  baneful  purposes  of 
this  ancient  enemy  of  the  human  family  ;  it  pleased  God,  in  the 
time  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  to  grant  to  Satan  and  his  angels  the 
power  to  possess  certain  individuals,  i.  e.  to  torment  them  with  dis- 
eases. Thus  the  sickness  of  the  blind  and  deaf  man,  in  Matt.  12: 
22 — 28,  who  is  called  daifnoviCofifvog  possessed  of  the  devil,  is  by 
our  Saviour  himself  (v.  26)  attributed  to  ^aiavug  or  BeelCf^ovl, 
lap;fQ)i/  daifxoviMv  Satan  or  Beelzebub,  the  prince  of  demons.  And, 
in  reference  to  the  woman  who  had  been  sick  eighteen  years,  Jesus 
isaid,  "  Satan  bound  her;"  and  in  v.  11,  it  is  said  '^  nvevfjia  do'&e- 
piiag  i'xovau  having  a  spirit  of  disease.  Jesus  declared  the  subju- 
gation of  the  demons  by  the  70  disciples,  to  be  a  humiliation  of  Sa- 
tan;'* and  those  who  were  possessed  (Acts  10:  38)  and  whom  Je- 
sus healed,  are  called  xaTudwaarevofAfvoi  vno  tov  dia^oXov  who 
iwere  held  under  the  dominion  of  the  devil.  That  such  power  was 
given  also  to  the  angels  of  Satan,  is  taught  in  the  passage  oqxig  nal 

1  Dissert.  III.  in  libros  historicos  N.  T.  p.  58—61. 

2  Comment,  in  Protevangelium,  p.  20.     Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  433. 

3  Comment,  de  Prolovangelio,  p.  21.     Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  434. 

4  Luke  19:  17,  18. 

42 


330  OF  ANGELS.  [bK,  Ifl, 


aKogntoi — naau  ^  dupufiig  lou  ix^^gov^  serpents  and  scorpions  and 
every  power  of  the  enemy.  That  the  influence  of  the  devils  was 
exerted  in  the  form  of  diseases,  we  learn  from  the  passages,  Acts 
10:  38,  io)f.iivog  rovg  ^axadvvuQiivo^ivovg  vno  tov  dialioXov  bealiog 
those  who  were  under  the  dominion  of  the  devil ;  and  5:  16, 
v')(^\oviJi6vot  vno  nvevfitnTOiv  wAuxfaQXMv  i-OfganiuovTo  those  who 
were  distressed  by  unclean  spirits  were  healed.  The  phrases  also 
in  which  the  devils  are  spoken  of  as  "  being  in'*  or  "  going  out'^ 
"  or  being  driven  out,"  must  be  regarded  as  figurative  expressions, 
the  first  of  which  is  used  to  denote  the  influence  of  the  demon  on 
the  individual,  and  the  last  two  to  denote  the  cessation  or  removal 
of  this  influence.^  But  Christ  had  the  power,  to  destroy  this  visible 
influence  of  the  devil,  in  a  visible  manner.  The  same  power  he 
granted  to  his  disciples  :  Matt.  10:  1,  and  Jesus  gave  to  his  twelve 
disciples  authority  over  unclean  spirits,  to  cast  them  out.  Luke  10: 
17,  the  devils  are  subject  to  us  in  thy  name.  Mark  16:  17,  in  thy 
name  they  shall  cast  out  devils.  And  even  to  those  also  who  were 
not  his  followers  such  power  was  given  :  "  by  whom  do  your  sons 
expel  demons  (said  Jesus  to  the  Pharisees,)  ol  viol  vfiwv,  sc.  xtav 
0cxgiGalo)i>,  h  rivi  tyi^alXovat  tol  datfiovtw"  Matt.  12:  27.  Mark 
9:  38,  39.  (See  ^  8.  lllust.  3.) 

Some  of  the  narratives  of  the  influence  of  demons,  are  of  such  a 
nature,  that  no  reasonable  exposition  can  w^ell  be  given  of  them, 
without  admitting  the  reality  of  demoniacal  agency.  Such  for  ex- 
ample, is  the  account  of  the  expulsion  of  the  devils  from  the  two 
possessed  men  in  the  country  of  the  Gergesenes  (Matt.  8:  28  etc. 
also  Mark  5:  1 — 4.  Luke  8:  26 — 37).^  Jesus  could  not  have  ad- 
dressed those  demons  and  granted  them  permission  to  enter  into  the 
swine,  if  he  had  not  really  regarded  demons  as  the  cause  of  the  dis- 
ease of  these  individuals.  Otherwise,  he  would  have  confirmed  an 
error  of  his  cotemporaries,  not  only  with  words,  but  actually  by  the 
performance  of  a  miracle.  We  must  carefully  distinguish  between 
the  expressions  ''curing  a  demoniac  or  one  possessed  of  a  devil 
[daif.iouiC6f^£vog,'']  and  "  expelling  demons  or  commanding  them  to 
depart,  l-A^allcLv  dalfAOvag,  iniriiJLav  v.  nagayyfXiTv  i'^d-dfJv."  It 
might  indeed  be  conceded  that,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  lan- 
guage, the  expression  demoniac  signified  a  person  affected  by  a  par- 
ticular natural  disease ;  and  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
used  it  in  its  common  acceptation,  although  that  acceptation  of  the 
word  originated  in  an  erroneous  opinion;  just  as  the  word  lunatic 
(^ailr]2>ia6'^^ivog  Matt.  4:  24)  could  with  propriety  be  applied  to  a 

1  Luke  10:  19.  See  Dissert,  de  sensu  histor.  p.  37.  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  I.  p.  47. 

2  See  Dissert,  on  the  atonement,  p.  538. 

3  Vide  Dissert,  de  sensu  historico  N.  Test.  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  I.  p.  53—55. 


^51.]  DEMONIACAL  POSSESSIONS.  331 

certain  species  of  diseased  persons,  because,  though  it  originated  in 
error,  it  had  by  usage,  become  the  customary  name  of  persons 
affected  by  a  certain  disease  ;  and  yet  it  would  by  no  means  follow, 
that  the  person  who  thus  uses  the  word  \f\  its  ordinary  acceptation, 
must  have  entertained  the  erroneous  opinion  that  the  subjects  of 
lunacy  were  under  the  particular  influence  of  the  moon.  Thus 
when  the  astronomer  uses  the  erroneous  phraseology  "  the  sun  rises, 
or  the  sun  goes  down,"  no  one  would  think  of  charging  him  with 
holding  that  vulgar  opinion.  But  if  we  suppose  that  when  Jesus 
addressed  the  demons,  and  when  he.  commanded  them  to  depart,  he 
at  the  same  time  believed  the  disease  to  be  entirely  natural,  and 
to  have  no  connexion  with  demoniacal  influence  ;  we  could  not  be- 
lieve that  Jesus  merely  used  a  customary  peculiar  expression  which 
usage  had  made  proper ;  but  we  must  believe  that  he  actually  con- 
firmed an  erroneous  opinion  by  the  language  which  he  used.  In 
reference  to  the  possession  above  mentioned  (Matt.  8:  28,)  Hess 
remarks,^  "  The  fact  that  these  demoniacs  had,  agreeably  to  the 
narrative  itself,  actually  been  delivered  from  their  affection  [ol  di 
i'§{l{)6vTeg  v.  32)  before  any  thing  happened  to  the  herd  of  swine, 
proves  that  it  was  not  the  possessed  persons  who  threw  themselves 
among  the  swine  in  a  fit  of  madness,  but  that  it  was  the  devils  who 
had  been  expelled  from  these  persons."  And  it  is  evident  from 
the  history  of  this  event,  that  its  object  was  to  expose  to  view,  in 
reference  to  the  defence  of  himself  which  Jesus  was  compelled  to 
make  against  the  most  horrible  slanders  (Matt.  12:  24,)  the  number 
[hyffot^  legion,  Luke  8:  39]  and  malignity  of  these  demons,  and 
their  actual  though  involuntary  subjection  to  Jesus  (Luke  8:  31  ;) 
and  the  utmost  publicity  was  given  to  this  matter  by  the  incident  of 
the  swine.^  Relative  to  the  cures  of  the  demoniacs  in  general, 
which  are  related  in  the  New  Testament,  Hess  makes  the  following 
remark  :^  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  sacred  historians  did  actually 
mean  vexatious  spirits,  who  grievously  oppressed  the  bodies  and 
minds  of  men  ;  agreeably  to  their  intention,  therefore,  the  numerous 
examples  of  the  cures  of  demoniacs  acquire  a  peculiar  importance, 
inasmuch  as  Jesus  appears,  not  only  as  their  deliverer  from  bodily 
evil,  but  as  the  conqueror  of  hostile  powers  from  the  invisible  world." 
Paulus,  in  his  commentary  on  the  New  Testament,"^  has  maintain- 
ed that  the  cures  of  the  demoniacs  were  nothing  else  than  the  cures 
of  diseases  of  the  mind,  which  were  effected  by  the  opinion  in  the 
deranged  persons,  that  the  demons  which  possessed  them  could  not 
1  exist  near  that  man  of  God,  the  Messiah  ;  and  therefore  that  they 

1  Uber  die  Lehren,  Thaten  und  Schicksale  unseres  Herrn,  S.  258. 

2  On  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  of  John,  p.  322. 

3  Sup.  cit.259.  *  Vol.  II,  III. 


332  OF  ANGELS.  [bK.  III. 

must  necessarily  flee  at  his  approach.  In  reply  to  this,  a  writer  in 
the  Tiib.  gel.  Anz.^  justly  remarks,  "  It  is  altogether  incredible  that, 
in  so  short  a  time,  and  in  the  population  of  one  smal)  country,  a 
mere  opinion  should  of  itself,  in  so  many  instances,  have  effected  a 
permanent  cure  of  mental  derangement,  a  disease  generally  resolt- 
ing  from  some  radical  disorganization  of  the  body  ;  or  that  in  so 
many  cases  it  should  happen,  that  just  at  the  precise  time  when 
Jesus  approached  such  unfortunate  beings,  the  bodily  causes  of  their 
derangement  should  in  every  instance  have  spontaneously  vanished, 
and  their  minds  have  been  restored,  by  mere  chance." 

The  physical  influence  of  wicked  angels  is,  moreover,  corrobora- 
ted by  those  declarations  of  Christ  himself,  which  were  uttered  on 
occasions  when  he  might  have  expressed  his  opinion  without  res- 
ervation, as  he  was  not  addressing  the  multitude,  but  speaking  to 
his  confidential  disciples,^  and  on  those  occasions  when  there  was 
peculiar  reason  for  his  contradicting  the  popular  opinion,  if  he  had 
entertained  a  different  one  himself.  Thus,  when  the  Pharisees 
charged  him  with  casting  out  demons  by  the  aid  of  the  devil,  their 
prince,  it  would  have  been  peculiarly  necessary  for  him  to  contra- 
dict the  doctrine  of  demons,  if  he  had  not  believed  it  himself^  But 
surely  it  is  far  from  being  philosophical,  to  give  a  forced,  unnatural 
exposition  of  such  plain  passages  as  those  referred  to  in  the  Gospels, 
relative  to  demoniacs,  merely  because  the  subject  borders  on  some 
obscurity,  and  because  we  do  not  know  the  manner  in  which  the  in- 
fluence of  wicked  angels  on  men  is  exerted. "*  And  as  to  the  narra- 
tive contained  in  Acts  16:  16 — 18,  it  is  not  necessary,  as  Michaelis^ 
and  Eckermann^  have  contended,  to  believe  that  Paul  and  Luke 
accommodated  themselves  to  a  false  opinion.  For  we  are  under 
no  necessity  of  adopting  their  translation  of  the  phrase  -nvavva.  IIT- 
0SlNO2j  spirit  of  Apollo,  as  Paul  and  Luke  both  regarded  Apollo 
as  a  mere  empty  fictitious  name."^  But  the  usage  of  the  language 
will  warrant  us  in  considering  nv&wvog  as  equivalent  to  iyyuoigi- 
fiv&ov  i.  e.  spirit  of  a  ventriloquist.  This  sense  of  the  word  nv&wv 
is  fully  ^tablished  by  Wetstein  and  Schleusner  ;  and  both  quote 
the  following  passage  from  Plutarch  de  Defectu  Oraculorum  L.  II, 
iyyaoTQifivd^ovg  Eiigv^ktag  nalai,  vvvi  Tlvd^favccg  iigogayogfvofiivovg 
i.  e.  ventriloquists  were  formerly  denominated  Euryclitae,  but  now 

1  for  1801,  p.  279.  2  Matt.  17  19,  21.  Luke  10:  17,  21. 

3  Matt.  12:  28.  29.  Dissert,  de  sensu  histor.  Not.  63.  and  Hessuber  die  Lehren 
und  Tliaten  unseres  Hernn,  S.  257 — 2C4. 

4  See  Dissert,  on  thedeatii  of  Jesus,  p.  539. 

5  Dogmatik,  S.  353  etc.  and  Notes  on  the  New  Test.  Ft.  II.  p.  375. 

6  Conipend.  Theolog.  christianae,  p.  89. 

7  I  Cor.  8;  4.  10:  19,  ovSiv  EiSvAov  fv  xooftto  an  idol  is  nothing  in  the  world. 


§  51.]  DEMONIACAL  POSSESSIONS.  333 

they  are  called  diviners  or  fortunetellers,  literally,  Pythons.  The 
damsel  had  actually  been  sick,  and  by  her  disease  had  become  a 
ventriloquist.  For  if  she  had  merely  been  playing  a  game  of 
deception,  which  she  had  been  able  to  perform  without  any  pe- 
culiarity of  bodily  conformation,  Paul's  commanding  that  spirit  to 
come  out  of  her  (v.  18,)  could  not  have  deprived  her  of  the  power 
of  continuing  her  practice.  Accordingly,  Michaelis  admits  that  her 
disease  enabled  her  to  practise  this  deception.'  But  the  cause  of 
the  disease  by  which  the  damsel  had  become  a  ventriloquist,  may 
have  been  the  same  as  the  cause  of  other  diseases  which  Christ 
cured,  that  is,  it  may  have  resulted  from  the  influence  of  a  {7TvfVf,ia) 
wicked  angel.  Uviu^a  nvdoyvog,  therefore,  signifies  an  evil  spirit 
who  produced  ventriloquism,  just  as  in  Luke  13:  11,  nvtv^a  aoite- 
viiccg  means  an  evil  spirit  which  produced  disease.  Nor  can  it  be 
objected  to  in  this  interpretation,  that  in  the  first  case  the  genitive 
nv&(ovog  is  a  concrete,  whilst  in  the  latter  case  the  genitive  ao^eveiag 
is  an  abstract  word.  For  the  metonymy  by  which  the  effect  is 
placed  instead  of  the  cause,  occurs  in  concrete  words  as  well  as  in 
such  as  are  abstract ;  and  nvevfAa  nu'&coi^og  is  a  genitive  in  appo- 
sition, and  is  equivalent  to  nvevfiu  quod  est  ttv-O^wv}  Thus  in  Luke 
11:  14.  Mark  9:  25,  17,  a  dumb,  speechless  spirit  (iivevf^a  xwqroV, 
akakov)  signifies  nothing  else  than  a  spirit  which  had  made  the  per- 
son who  was  possessed  {daifAovi^ouevog  Matt.  12: 22)  by  him, 
dumb  :  and  so  also  "  a  spirit  which  was  a  ventriloquist  {uv&mv") 
may  just  as  well  signify  "  a  spirit  that  made  a  person  a  ventriloquist.'^ 
Finally,  the  objection  against  the  actual  influence  of  evil  spirits 
on  the  bodies  of  certain  individuals,  which  Eichhorn^  would  derive 
from  the  silence  of  St.  John  on  the  subject,  possesses  no  force.  For 
we  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  cause  of  his  silence  was  a 
disbelief  of  demoniacal  influence.  On  the  other  hand,  that  his 
opinion  was  directly  the  reverse,  v^'e  know  with  certainty,  from  the 
passages  of  his  works  which  were  quoted  in  ^<5)  50,  51,  52.  The 
true  cause  of  this  silence  appears  to  lie  in  the  general  scope  of  his 
Gospel  ;  inasmuch  as  he  did  not  intend  to  furnish  a  complete  his- 
tory of  the  actions  of  Jesus  (as  we  have  proved  in  the  work  on  the 
Object  of  John's  Gospel  "^  1,)  but  presupposed  the  greater  part  of 
his  miracles  as  known  to  his  readers  from  their  acquaintance  with 
the  other  Gospels,  and  among  the  rest  also  the  cures  of  those  pos- 
sessed with  devils  ;  see  ^12.  II.  4.  St.  John's  plan  was  to  select 
only  a  few  particular  miracles  from  the  whole  number  of  cures, 
which  he  ijimself  states  (6:  2)  to  have  been  very  great.  In  ac- 
cordance with  his  plan,  therefore,  he  has  given  us  only  three  ;  viz. 

1  See  his  Notes  on  v.  16,  17. 

^  Observy.p.  104.     Btblioth.  of  Bibl.  Lit.  Vol.  4.  p.  :i33,  etc. 


A 

334  OF  ANGELS.  [bK.  III. 

the  cure  of  the  courtier's  son  who  lay  sick,  at  a  distance  from  him  ; 
the  cure  of  the  man  at  Bethesda,  who  had  been  sick  eight  and 
thirty  years  ;  and  the  cure  of  the  man  born  blind.  Certainly,  then, 
it  is  not  remarkable,  that  among  so  few  examples,  there  should  not 
have  been  the  cure  of  a  disease  which  had  been  produced  by  an 
evil  spirit. 


SECTION   LII. 


The  pernicious  influence  of  wicked  angels  can  be  withstood j  and  it 
is  our  duty  to  resist  it. 

Still  the  utmost  exertions  of  wicked  angels,  can  accomplish  no 
more  than  to  gain  them  an  influence  over  those(l)  whose  disposi- 
tions had  previously  accorded  with  that  of  Satan, (2)  that  is,  over 
those  who  had  been  lovers  of  sin.  (3)  The  more  watchful  we  are 
in  avoiding  sin,  the  more  secure  shall  we  be  against  the  evil  influ- 
ence of  wicked  angels.  And  the  same  means  which  are  appointed 
to  enable  us  to  resist  the  general  influence  of  sin  where  no  Satanic 
agency  exists,  will  fortify (4)  us  against  the  influence  of  evil  spirits, 
if  it  should  be  added  to  the  other  temptations  to  sin.  Hence,  as 
Satan  can  have  access  to  the  human  heart  only  through  the  fault  of 
the  individual  himself,  who  exposes  himself  to  his  influence  and 
gives  him  opportunity  to  plunge  him  deeper  into  sin, (5)  it  follows, 
that  we  cannot  justify  ourselves  for  the  commission  of  those  sins,  by 
attempting  to  cast  the  blame  upon  Satan.  For  neither  the  devil 
nor  any  external  temptation  can  have  any  influence  upon  us,  ex- 
cepting by  our  own  fault.  To  this  source  indeed  all  our  sins  must 
ultimately  be  referred.  They  can  never  accomplish  any  thing, 
excepting  when  we  neglect  to  resist  the  inward  temptations  (James 
1:  14)  by  the  use  of  those  means  which  must  be  resorted  to  in  every 
temptation,  whether  or  not  the  influence  of  wicked  angels  is  added 
to  the  other  allurements  to  transgression.  It  cannot  indeed,  in 
individual  cases,  be  determined  with  certainty  whether  Satanic  in- 
fluence has  been  exerted  or  not  ;(6)  and  yet  its  certainty  is  pre- 
supposed by  those  who  seek  extenuation  of  their  crimes  by  at- 


^  52.]  **RES1ST  THE  DEVIL."  335 

tributing  them  to  the  agency  of  evil  spirits  ;  a  refuge  altogether  vain, 
even  if  that  certainty  were  established.  But  although  we  are  not 
able  in  individual  cases,  to  assert  the  certain  existence  of  such  influ- 
.ence;  we  must  not  forget  the  general  truth  that  such  agency  is 
actually  exerted  ;(7)  in  order  that  we  may  have  reference  in  our 
conduct  to  these  enemies  of  our  real(8)  welfare,  who  rejoice  in  our 
misery,  and  by  whose  power  and  subtlety (9)  the  unwary  are  often 
led  on  to  greater  lengths  in  sin(lO)  than  they  of  themselves(ll) 
would  go ;  that  thus  we  may  be  the  more  watchful(12)  in  avoiding 
those  sins  by  which  Satan  and  his  angels  gain  access  to  our  hearts, 
and  be  the  more  diligent  in  the  use  of  those  means(13)  which  shall 
best  fortify  us  against  the  seductions  of  the  devil.  And  how  much 
more  salutary  would  be  the  practical  influence,  which  the  inculca- 
tion of  this  doctrine  of  Scripture(14)  would  exert,  to  stimulate  men 
to  virtue  and  deter  them  from  the  paths  of  vice,  than  that  which 
would  result  from  an  entire  rejection  of  belief  in  the  agency  of  wick- 
ed spirits,  whether  the  doctrine  is  clearly  taught  in  Scripture,  or  is  a 
supplement  annexed  to  it  by  the  superstition  of  men  !  But  this  in- 
temperate zeal,  which  wages  war  alike  against  truth  and  error,  has 
other  consequences  of  the  most  pernicious  nature.  It  awakens  in 
the  minds  of  common  people  suspicions  against  the  validity  of  those 
arguments  which  are  accordant  with  Scripture,  and  reason,  and 
which  are  employed  to  reclaim  them  from  those  erroneous  opinions 
which  they  often  intermingle  with  the  truth,  and  thus  confirms  them 
still  more  in  their  superstitions. 

Illustrations. 

I.  1  John  5:  18,  he  that  is  born  of  God  taketh  care  of  himself, 
and  the  wicked  one  toucheth  him  not. 

II.  John  8:  44,  ye  wish  to  do  the  lusts  of  your  ffither  the  devil. 

III.  1  John  3:  8,  he  thas  doeth  sin  is  of  the  devil. 

IV.  "  Truth,"  "  righteousness,"  "  faith"  ''  the  word  of  God," 
"  prayer,"  are  the  means  specified  in  the  following  passages  to  resist 
the  influence  of  the  devil  and  his  angels,  azrjvat  ngog  lag  fifx^odaiag 
Tov  dia§6Xov — avTi(ST'!\vcit,  avKu — a^iaat  7«  ^^^V  "^ov  noptjgov,  to 
stand  against  the  wiles  of  the  devil — to  withstand  him — to  quench 
the  darts  of  the  wicked  one.  Ephes.  6:  14 — 18.  1  Pet.  5:  8,  9. 
James  5:  7.  .cayA  .owj«^«.*^  .»^  .ii  jvii»^»»«T 


336  OP  ANGELS.  [bK.  tU. 

V.  1  Cor.  7:  5,  that  Satan  tempt  you  not  through  your  incon- 
tinence. 

VI.  The  reader  may  consult  the  sermon  on  the  inexcusability 
of  men  if  they  are  not  saved  (p.  11  etc.,)  by  the  author  of  this 
work. 

VII.  A  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  demons  and  of  the 
schemes  which  they  are  prosecuting,  enables  us  to  acquire  more 
comprehensive  views  of  the  oj'igin  and  progress  of  human  misery, 
and  casts  new  light  on  the  influence  of  the  merits  of  Christ  and  our 
obligation  to  him.  "  The  value  of  the  atonement  of  Christ  must 
assume  a  still  higher  importance  and  appear  in  a  more  interesting 
light,  when  we  reflect  that  his  death  defeated  the  grand  scheme  of 
Satan  to  draw  us  into  the  wretched  state  and  society  of  the  wicked 
angels,  and  that,  on  the  other  hand,  a  right  was  thereby  purchased 
for  our  admission  into  the  blessed  kingdom  of  God."^ 

VIII.  Eph.  6;  16.  ]  Pet.  5:  8,  your  adversary,  the  devil,  goeth 
about,  like  a  roaring  lion  seeking  whom  he  may  devour. 

IX.  The  power  of  evil  spirits  is  designated  by  the  expressions 
(ji(jxc(i,  i^ovaiat,  xonftox^arogfg  lov  aycoiov?,  principalities,  powers, 
rulers  of  darkness  ;  and  their  subtlety  is  called  "  wiles  or  stratagems 
of  the  devil."  Eph.  6:  11,  12. 

X.  Eph.  6:  13,  ei/  ztj  rifitQ€f  ttj  novtjg^  in  the  evil  day. 

XI.  This  doctrine  should  'prompt  us  to  spiritual  watchfulness, 
— We  know  that  the  seductive  influence  of  wicked  men  and  the 
unhappy  concurrence  of  outward  circumstances,  as  little  dependent 
on  us  as  are  the  temptations  of  evil  spirits,  have  usually  a  great  in- 
fluence on  the  magnitude  of  our  crimes  and  the  lamentable  effects 
-attending  them,  if  we  neglect  to  resist  the  beginnings  of  evil,  and  to 
arm  ourselves  against  them  by  the  influence  of  piety.  It  is  there- 
fore the  more  natural  to  suppose,  that  the  danger  of  falling  a  prey 
to  the  influence  of  evil  spirits  should  be  added  to  the  other  dangers 
of  sin,  in  order  that  it  might  serve  to  warn  those  who  abandon  them- 
selves to  the  influence  of  sin,  or  who  are  at  least  indifferent  on  the 
subject,  against  so  perilous  a  course  of  conduct. 

XII.  1  Pet.  5:  8,  vi^ifjats,  ygt^yogijaccri  be  sober,  be  watchful. 

XIII.  Eph.  6:  11,  ivdvaaaOe  i^v  navonXlav  zov  d^fou  put  on 
ihe  armour  of  God. 

By  the  views  which  have  been  thus  far  discussed  in  this  (52) 
section,  the  objections  are  refuted  which  have  been  urged  against 
the  moral  tendency  of  the  doctrine  of  the  influence  of  evil  Spirits. 
Staiidlin,  in  his  history  of  the  Ethical  system  of  Jesus,  has  thus  ex- 
pressed these  objections  :    "  The  allurements  to  sin  and  the  diffi- 

1  Comment,  de  Protevangelio,  p.  22.    Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  435. 


I 


<5>  52.]  INFLUENCE  OF  EVIL  SPIRITS.  337 


culty  of  a  virtuous  life  are  of  themselves  sufficiently  great  and  pow- 
erful. But  if,  in  addition  to  this,  we  regard  them  as  the  schemes 
of  an  invisible  enemy  to  human  virtue  and  human  happiness,  pos- 
sessed of  the  most  formidable  power,  deceitfulness,  and  cunning  ; 
how  easily  may  the  mind  of  mfui  be  terrified  with  apprehensions 
and  filled  with  despondency,  how  easily  might  his  noblest  moral 
powers  be  paralyzed,  and  his  cheerful  obedier.ce  to  the  obligations 
of  duty  be  converted  into  a  timorous  effort  to  escape  the  wiles  of 
Satan, — into  a  constant  fear  and  trembling  before  him  ?  Or  would 
not  persons  of  different  temperament  and  character,  cast  all  the 
blame  of  their  crimes  on  Satan  ?  About  the  circumstance  that 
Satan  cannot  prevail  over  him  unless  he  himself  previously  paves 
the  vvay  for  him,  he  will  care  but  little ;  for  he  would,  at  any  rate, 
never  be  able  to  determine  how  far  his  own  guilt  extended,  and 
where  that  of  Satan  began." 

XIV.  The  doctrine  of  the  injiiitnce  of  evil  spirits ,  is  most 
abundantly  taufrht  by  Christ  and  his  apostles. — No  reason  can  be 
assigned  why  Jesus  should  have  hesitated  publicly  to  reject  the 
doctrine  concerning  evil  spirits,  if  he  believed  it  false.  The  Sad- 
ducees,  we  know  (Acts  23:  8),  thought  themselves  at  liberty  to  re- 
ject it;  and  Jesus  did  not  hesitate  to  join  them  in  their  opposition 
to  the  traditions,  and  openly  to  reject  them  without  caring  about 
the  offence  which  he  would  give,  althougli  these  traditions  were  far 
more  holy  in  the  eyes  of  the  Jews  than  the  doctrine  of  evil  spirits, 
Matt.  15:  12—14.  Had  his  object  been  to  avoid  giving  offence,  it 
would  not  even  have  been  necessary  for  him  to  confirm  the  doctrine  ; 
he  could  have  passed  it  over  in  entire  silence.  But  he  appears  in- 
tentionally to  hav^e  sought  occasion  to  mention  the  devil,  without 
having  been  urged  to  it,  and  without  having  any  occasion  for  it,  in  a 
conversation  (John  ch.  8,)  in  which,  instead  of  avoiding,  he  increas- 
ed the  offence  occasioned  by  the  mention  of  the  devil.  John  8:  48 
— 52.  He  mentioned  him  with  the  utmost  confidence,  precisely  at 
the  time  when  he  professed  his  claim  to  implicit  credibiUty  (38,  40, 
42,  45 — 47)  and  when  he  uttered  his  most  solemn  abhorrence  ol 
falsehood  of  every  kind(44).  But  it  was  not  only  before  the  popu- 
lace that  he  taught  this  doctrine,  but  when  alone  with  his  disciples 
he  inculcated  the  same  truth. ^  Let  tlie  reader  consult  the  following 
passages,  in  which  he  is  conversing  with  his  disciples  alone  about 
Satan  and  his  angels.  Matt.  13:  36,  38.  25:  41.  24:  3.  Mark  4: 10, 
15.  Luke  22:  31.  Nay,  agreeably  to  John  16:  7,  8,  11,  he  classed 
this  among  the  principal  doctrines  which  the  Holy  Spirit  through 
his  instrumentality  would  publish  to  the  world.     "  In  this  passage 


I  §51.  III.  6. 

43 


I 

338  OF  ANGELS.  [bK.  HI, 

Jesus  is  not  addressing  the  illiterate  populace,  but  he  is  speaking  to 
his  own  apostles.  Nor  is  he  conversing  of  unimportant  opinions 
which  might  yet  be  tolerated  for  sometime,  but  of  the  future  preach- 
ing of  these  teachers  of  the  world.  Nor  is  he  speaking  of  certain 
modifications  which  the  discourses  of  the  apostles  might  assume  from 
their  own  infirmities,  or  of  the  erroneous  ideas  of  some  of  their  hear- 
ers, but  of  the  contents  of  their  Gospel,  as  derived  from  the  Spirit 
of  God  (v.  7,)  who  should  teach  the  truth  (v.  13,)  regardless  of  the 
circumstance  whether  it  accorded  with  their  former  ideas  or  contra- 
dicted them."^  Thus  St.  Paul  also,  who  had  dared  to  overturn  the 
magical  system  of  the  Ephesians,^  regarded  the  doctrine  of  evil 
spirits  as  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  the  dignity  of  that  very  Chris- 
tianity which  had  discarded  superstition.  And  he  did  not  hesitate 
to  interweave  this  doctrine  with  his  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians^  them- 
selves, although  he  in  this  same  Epistle  inveighs  against  the  super- 
stition of  the  Essenes  with  which  the  Ephesians  w^ere  in  danger  of 
being'tinctured.  Had  not  Paul  believed  the  doctrine  of  wicked 
angels,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  would  surely  have  been  the 
last  place  in  which  he  would  have  spoken  so  impressively  and  cir- 
cumstantially concerning  the  temptations  of  wicked  angels;  as  he  in 
this  very  Epistle,  was  contending  against  the  Essenes,  who  had 
manifested  a  veneration  for  good  angels  and  a  terror  of  wicked  ones 
altogether  extreme." 

The  circumstance  that  Peter,  in  the  passage  1  Pet.  5:  8,  may 
probably  have  had  the  words  of  Christ  (Luke  22:  31  etc.)  in  his 
view,  renders  it  still  more  probable  that  by  dvTidixog  [adversary,]  he 
meant  diu^oXog  or  ^aravag  [the  devil  or  Satan.]  Luke  22:  31. 

XV.  "  It  is  proper  to  make  some  remarks  on  this  subject,  in  or- 
der that  those  passages  of  Scripture  which  relate  to  it,  may  not  be 
misunderstood.  But  should  any  one  reject  the  whole  doctrine,  the 
manifest  violence  which  would  thus  be  offered  to  so  many  passages 
of  Scripture,  would  rouse  the  minds  of  the  hearers  and  convince 
them  that  an  attempt  was  made  to  wrest  from  them  doctrines  evi-  i 
dently  taught  in  the  word  of  God.  They  would  therefore  retain 
even  their  erroneous  additions  to  the  truth,  which  by  a  proper  use 
of  Scripture  they  might  be  induced  to  reject ;  because  they  saw  that 
an  attempt  was  made  to  contradict  them,  where  truth  was  manifest- 
ly on  their  side."^ 


1  Tab.  gel.  Anieijr.  3790.  p.  141  ;  and   Hess  fiber  die  Lehrcn,  Thaten  und 
Schicksale  unseres  Herrn,  S.  173  f.  255  r. 


2  Acts  19:  19.  3  ch.  2:2.  6:  11. 

■^  Tubingen  gelehrt.  Anzeigen,  fUr  1790,  S.  143. 


m^i 


BOOK    IIL 

OF    CREATED    RATIONAL    BEINGS. 


PART  II.— OF  MAN. 


SECTION   I. 

OF  THE  PRIMITIVE  STATE  OF  MAN,     THE  FALL  AND  ITS  CONSE- 
QUENCES. 

§  53.     Primitive  state  of  man. 

Experience  teaches  us  that  all  human  bodies  are  subject  to  mor- 
tality, and  that  we  have  no  sooner  arrived  at  a  sense  of  duty,(l) 
than  we  violate(2)  its  obligations,  i.  e.  we  sin, (3)  in  various  ways. 
But  the  Scriptures  inform  us  that  this  twofold  evil  of  the  human 
family  did  not  exist  originally,  but  is  an  incidental  evil. (4)  Those 
first  individuals,  whom  God  intended  to  be  the  progenitors  of  the 
whole  human  family,(5)  viz.(6)  that  one  individual  man(7)  and  the 
woman  who  was  subsequently(8)  produced  by  the  agency  of  God,, 
were,  like  every  thing  else,  created  good  and  perfect. (9)  Agreea- 
bly to  the  object  of  the  Creator,  the  peculiar  superiority  of  man, 
consisted  in  his  similarity  to  God. (10)  And  this  superiority,  as  far 
as(ll)  it  was  to  be  evinced  by  the  dignity,  the  power,  and  the  do- 
minion of  man  over  other  terrestrial  creatures,(12)  resulted  from  his 
rational  and  moral  nature. (13)  But  a  being  possessing  a  moral  na- 
ture in  perfect  maturity^  as  was  immediately  the  case  with  our  first 


340  OF  MA^.  [bK.  Ill, 

parents, (14)  could  not  possess  that  degree  of  moral  perfection  with 
which  our  first  parents  are  said  (Gen.  1:  31)  to  have  been  endowed, 
without  also  being  morally  good  and  free  from  sin.  Hence  the 
likeness  of  our  first  parents  to  God,  consisted  principally  in  the  cir- 
cumstance(15)  that  they  were  pure  from  sin,  and  by  virtue  of  their 
natural  faculties,(l6)  were  able  to  avoid  sin  and  fulfil  the  obligations 
of  duty  Gen.  3:  2,  3.  Had  they  preserved  this  moral  purity,  they 
would  not  have  been  subjected  to  the  necessity  of  dying, (17)  an 
evil  introduced  into  the  world  by  the  guih(18)  of  man.(19)  For 
God  had  given  them  means  for  the  perpetual  preservation  of  their 
lives,  and  in  the  possession  of  these  they  would  have  ever  remained^ 
if  they  had  not  sinned  against  their  heavenly  Father.(20) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Rom.  7:  8,  9,  iX(}ovor/g  tvioltig  i>]  d^iaQtla  avt^rioev  when  the 
commandment  came,  sin  revived. 

n.  Rom.  3:  9 — 20,  22,  23,  tiuvtss  ijfAagroP  xal  vaxfiQOuvToii  Trjg 
do'iijg  Tov  x^eov  a\\  have  sinned  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God. 
Gen.  8:  21,  the  thoughts  of  the  heart  of  man  are  evil,  from  his  youth. 

III.  1  John  3:  4,  ^'  'd^a^ila  toilv  r\  di/o^ila  sin  is  the  transgression 
of  the  law. 

IV.  Rom.  5:  12  etc.  dl  ivog  (xp&gtonov  rj  df-iagila  iig  tov  Koofioif 
figrjX&6,  nal  did  Ttjg  dfiUQilag  6  ddvuiog  by  one  man  sin  entered  the 
world,  and  death  by  sin. 

V.  Gen.  1:  28,  God  said  to  them.  Be  fruitful  and  multiply  and 
fill  the  earth.  Acts  17:  26,  inohiai:  is  hog  c'i\ucxiog  nuv  td-vog 
dv&QMTTMv  KUTOfAHv  iul  Tidv  TO  Tiuogoinov  Tfjg  yrjg  he  hath  made  of 
one  blood  (descended,)  all  nations  of  men  to  dwell  upon  the  whole 
face  of  the  6arth. 

VI.  Gen.  1:  27.  Matt.  19:  4 — 6,  he  made  them  from  the  be- 
ginning, male  and  female. 

VII.  Gen.  2:  7,  comp.  v.  18  etc.  3:  6  etc.  Bruns,  in  an  In- 
vestigation of  the  most  ancient  sayings  concerning  the  origin  of  the 
human  family,  has  attempted  to  prove  from  Gen.  1:  26  etc.  5:  1 — 3^ 
that  God  originally  formed  several  persons  of  each  sex.  Yet  he 
admits  that  it  is  impossible  to  find  evidence  of  more  than  two  indi- 
viduals, namely,  one  male  and  one  female,  in  the  2d  and  3d  chap- 
ters, without  doing  violence  to  -language.  But  the  passages  in  the 
1st  and  5th  chapters,  are  perfectly  consistent  with  those  in  the  2d 
and  3d,  if  they  are  not  wrested  from  their  natural  meaning.  I  ad- 
rait  indeed,  that  in  both  cases  cnjiis  an  appellative  noun  [man]  and 


^53.1 


PRIMITIVE  STATE  OF  MAN.  341 


not  a  proper  name  [Adam,]  which  is  the  circumstance  to  which 
Bruns  appeals  ;  hut  it  by  no  means  follows,  that  in  either  of  these 
passages  (I:  27.  5:  2,)  the  translation  must  be  given  thus  :  ^'  God 
created  them,"  viz.  men,  who,  agreeably  to  what  preceded,  were 
like  him  [cnji  or  Dij<n,  comp.  ch.  6:  1,]  men  and  women;  but  it 
may  be  given  thus:  "  When  God  created  human  beings  in  his  own 
image,  he  created  a  man  and  a  woman,  and  blessed  them  (namely, 
the  man  and  the  woman)  and  called  them  men  [jiumon  beings,] 
when  they  were  created."  Thus,  in  the  expression  ijiohjaev  avtovg 
(Matt.  19:  4,)  uviovg  is  a  pleonasm  which,  we  may  remark,  is 
found  in  all  cases  in  which  the  noun  to  which  Uviog  refers,  is  not 
in  its  proper  place.  The  same  pleonasm  is  found  in  Matt.  21:  41, 
xuxavs  uupovg.  Other  examples  taken  from  profane  writers,  are 
given  by  Kypke  (on  Acts  19:  38,)  Eisner  (on  Rev.  2:  7,)  and 
Schleusner,  Justi,  in  a  work  the  object  of  which  is  to  refute  the 
hypothesis  of  Bruns,  grounds  his  argument,  in  part,  on  the  fact, 
that  in  Gen.  ch.  1  and  5,  the  very  same  word  (fc'iN)  is  used  to 
designate  the  person  spoken  of,  which  is  used  in  ch/2  and  3,  and 
that  consequently  they  must  be  the  same  ;  and  partly,  on  the  cir- 
cumstance that  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  as  he  mentions 
nothing  about  the  gender  of  the  other  animals  whose  creation  he 
narrates  (ch.  1:  20 — 25,)  would  not  have  specifically  mentioned  the 
creation  of  the  man  and  the  ivoman,  if  he  had  not  intended  to 
attract  particular  attention  to  the  remarkable  circumstance,  that  God 
determined  that  the  earth  should  be  peopled  from  a  single  couple. 
Moreover,  we  are  expressly  told  in  the  New  Testament,  that  one 
man,  together  with  the  woman  who  was  dependent  on  him,  was  the 
progenitor  of  the  whole  human  family, — that  man  (Rom.  5:  12 
— 15,)  who  on  account  of  his  priority  to  Eve  in  point  of  existence 
(1  Tim.  2:  13,)  is  called  the  first  man;  and  who,  on  account  of 
his  superiority  to  his  helper  (1  Cor.  11:  9,)  received  the  general 
name  man  [mi<  Gen.  5:  2]  in  a  peculiar  sense  [xut'  O^ox^jv}^  This 
truth  is  presupposed  in  the  discussion  of  the  important  doctrine  of 
the  redemption  of  the  human  family.  (^  59.) 

Vlll.  Gen.  2:  18  etc.  1  Tim.  2:  13,  Adam  was  formed  first, 
and  afterwards  Eve.  By  creating  the  woman  after  the  man  had 
been  formed,  and  in  the  presence  of  man,  God  wished  to  give  to 
Adam  an  ocular  illustration  of  his  own  formation,  and  thus,  by  this 
second  creation,  to  give  him  a  vivid  idea  of  his  own  Creator,  as  of 
a  powerful  and  benevolent  Being  who  carefully  provided  for  his 
necessities  and  prosperity  (Gen.  2:  18,  20.)  And  by  selecting  that 
particular  method  of  forming  woman  (Gen.  2:  21,)  God,  by  whose 


1  Gen.  2:7,Dni4n.5:  3.  Rom.  5:  14.    1  Cor.  15:  22,  45.    ITnn,  2: 13.     In  all 
these  passages  Di^'is  a  proper  noun. 


342  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

omnipotence  she  also  was  produced,^  intended  to  give  to  his  newly 
created  children  a  lively  sense  of  their  reciprocal  duties.  Gen.  2: 
^4.  Matt.  19:  5,  6.  Ephes.  5:  28—33.  1  Tim.  2:  12,  13.  1  Cor. 
11:  8,  9  ;  comp.  v.  7,  3.  and  Ephes.  5:  22,  23. 

Other  means  also  were  made  use  of  by  God,  to  furnish  his  newly 
formed  creatures  with  materials  for  the  improvement  of  their  under- 
standing and  heart.  Gen.  2:  15 — 17,  19,  20. 

Note.  Doederlein  remarks,  that  the  literal  explanation  of  this 
history  of  the  origin  of  the  woman,  is  confirmed  by  Paul  in  1  Cor. 
11:8. 

IX.  Gen.  1:  31,  God  saw  that  every  thing  which  he  had  made 
was  very  good  [Hn?3  m'n.] 

X.  Gen.  1:  26,  niN  nT!)3;p-n2ni72^3  I5^.b2£a  let  us  marke  man — 
in  our  own  image,  after  our  likeness,  comp.  ch.  5:  1. 

XI.  The  Scriptures  designate  those  as  being  like  unto  God,  who 
excel  others  in  dignity.  In  1  Cor.  11:7,  the  man,  as  head  of  the 
woman,  is  called  eixcov  d^eovthe  image  of  God.  In  Psalm  82:  6, 
the  regents  of  the  people  are  called  gods  [0*^11^5$]  and  sons  of  God 
[V^^^.  "^P.^;]  and  in  Heb.  1:  6,  Christ  as  the  most  exalted  of  kings  is 
termed  niooiiOTOxog  first  begotten. 

XII.  Gen.  1:  26—28.  James  3:  9,  7.  See,  in  Reinhardt's  Dog- 
matik  (p.  262),  a  refutation  of  the  opinion,  that  the  image  of  Qod 
consisted  merely  in  holding  the  dominion  of  the  earth. 

XIII.  Acts  17:  29,  we  [men]  being  like  unto  God  must  not 
think  that  the  godhead  is  like  unto  silver  or  gold  or  stone  or  a  life- 
less work  of  human  art.     «5>  25. 

XIV.  Gen.  2:  15—20. 

XV.  Moral  excellence  is  also  expressly  stated  as  a  mark  of 
similarity  to  God.  Col.  3:  10,  the  new  man,  who  is  renewed  ac- 
cording to  the  image  of  him  who  created  him.  Compare  Eph.  4:  24, 
the  new  man  created  according  to  God  in  righteousness  and  true 
holiness.  1  Pet.  1:  15,  16.  Matt.  5:  48. 

XVI.  The  possibility  of  sinning,  which  was  evinced  in  our  first 
parents  by  their  unhappy  conduct,  by  no  means  implies  that  they 
were  urged  to  transgression  by  a  necessity  of  their  nature,  and  that 
it  was  impossible  for  them  to  remain  faithful.  For  it  is  evident  from 
the  history  of  the  wicked  angels,  that  they  had  the  power  to  sin  ; 
and  yet  other  beings  of  the  same  rank,  viz.  the  good  angels,  were 
able  to  remain  faithful. 

XVII.  The  bodies  of  men  might  have  attained  a  higher  state 
of  perfection,  might  have  become  nvevf-tazixd  spiritual  bodies  (1  Cor. 
15:  45,  etc.),  might  have  been  transformed  [dXkaaasa&ai].  Eich- 
horn,  in  his  Repert.  for  Biblical  and  Oriental  literature,  remarks, 

1  Gen.  1:  27.  5:  2.  Matt.  10:  i,  he  made  male  and  female. 


§  54.]  PRIMITIVE  STATE  OF  MAN.  343 

"  The  fruit  of  the  tree  of  life  contained  some  salutary  properties, 
which  would  have  preserved  men  from  death,  if  they  had  not 
poisoned  themselves.  Still,  man  could  not  have  lived  for  ever,  so 
as  never  to  have  changed  this  tabernacle ;  ti-e  structure  of  his 
physical  conformation  is  not  adapted  to  it.  But  that  he  might  have 
enjoyed  a  life  which  should  not  have  been  terminated  by  deaths  but 
by  an  ennobling  transition  into  another  state  of  existence,  is  perfect- 
ly credible,"  vol.  4.  p.  200.  See  Reinhardt's  Dog.  «5.  70.  No.  3. 
p.  252. 

XVIII.  1  Cor.  15:  21,22,  dt  avOgcxiTiov  6  ^avarog — h  jm  yJda^ 
dno&i^?]a'Aovai  death  came  by  man — in  Adam  they  die. 

XIX.  Gen.  2:  17.  3:  17,  19.  Rom.  5:  12,  14  etc. 

XX.  Gen.  3:  22,  "  the  man  shall  not  eat  of  the  tree  of  life,  that 
he  may  live  for  ever  [obirb  "'n^."] 


SECTION    LIV. 


The  fall  of  our  first  parents. 

But  the  privilege  of  perpetuity  of  life,  was  withdrawn  from  our 
first  parents,(l)  when  Eve,  through  the  instigation  of  a  serpent,(2) 
who  ate  of  the  forbidden  fruit, (3)  was  at  length  herself  prompted  to 
mistrust  God (4)  and  disregard  his  prohibition  ;  and  when  Adam, 
through  her  influence,  was  induced  to  commit  the  same  sin. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Gen.  3:  19,  22  etc.  3T»rn  ^oy"bN  to  dus|  thou  shalt  return. 

II.  Explanation  oj  the  history  of  the  Fall. —  In  the  Comment. 
de  Protevangelio,  the  following  explanation  is  given  of  the  history 
of  the  fall:  "The  natural  serpent  ate  of  the  forbidden  fruit;  and 
Eve  observed  it.  The  devil  accordingly  took  occasion  to  connect 
with  this  circumstance  a  conversation  with  Eve,  in  order  to  induce 
her  to  transgress  the  command  of  God.  Eve  believed  it  was  the 
natural  serpent  that  spake  to  her,  and  supposed  that  the  eating  of 
that  fruit  had  conferred  on  the  serpent  the  power  of  rational  con- 
versation, which  she  had  hitherto  not  observed  in  any  of  the  animals 
around  her,  not  even  in  the  serpent  itself  which  she  had  known  be- 
fore"(v.  13.)  According  to  this  view  the  first  verse  of  ch.  3,  would 
be  translated  thus  :  "  The  natural  serpent  became  (as  it  seemed  to 
Eve)  more  subtle  than  any  other  animal."  [snn'-an-n^h  if3n.j  As, 


344  OF  MAN.  [^K.  III. 


agreeably  to  this  explanation.  Satan  had  abused  the  serpent's  eating 
of  the  fruit,  in  order  to  carry  on  a  concealed  conversation  with  Eve, 
he  was  accordingly  treated  as  a  serpent  when  tlie  punishment  was 
announced.  Tlie  sense  of  the  14th  verse  would  then  be  this: 
"  Thou  shalt  suffer  a  punishment,  such  as  no  irrational  animal  is 
capable  of  suffering ;  reproach  and  terror  shall  be  thy  everlasting 
portion,  (upon  thy  belly  shalt  thou  go  and  on  the  dust  shalt  thou 
feed."^)  This  interpretation  of  the  history,  has  been  misunderstood 
by  Gabler.^  He  supposes  that  it  entirely  denies  the  presence  of  a 
natural  serpent,  and  that  the  devil  is  meant  by  the  serpent  in  v.  1. 
But  this  explanation  admits,  that  in  v.  1,  a  natural  serpent  is  meant, 
and  that  Eve  thought  this  serpent  spoke  to  her,  whilst  it  was  Satan 
who,  though  invisible  to  her,  carried  on  a  concealed  conversation 
with  her  at  the  time  she  saw  the  serpent.  Thus  also  in  another 
place,  Gabler^  unjustly  lays  it  to  the  charge  of  this  interpretation, 
that  the  14th  verse  is  applied  simultaneously  to  Satan  and  the  nat- 
ural serpent  ;  w^hereas  it  only  requires  that  the  punishment  of  the 
devil  be  regarded  as  announced  to  him  in  figurative  language,  de- 
rived from  the  nature  of  the  serpent.  Nor  is  cunning  altogether 
denied  to  the  serpent,  but  only  the  ability  to  conduct  a  rational  con- 
versation, which  is  indeed  a  faculty  evidently  belonging  to  no 
irrational  animal. 

It  is  evident  that  the  conversation  between  Eve  and  the  serpent, 
could  not  have  consisted  merely  of  thoughts  and  suspicions  in  the 
mind  of  Eve,  as  has  been  contended  by  some.  This  is  clear  from 
the  following  reasons. —  I.  Eve  could  not  well  have  been  led  to 
believe  that  the  serpent  had  derived  so  much  wisdom  from  eating 
the  forbidden  fruit,  if  the  serpent  had  not  seemed  to  her  to  speak, 
and  had  only  given  some  mute  inducement  to  transgress  the  divine 
command.— 2.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  simplicity  of  the  narrative, 
to  doubt  that  such  occasion  for  disbelief  was  given,  and  to  represent 
the  conversation  with  the  serpent  as  being  merely  ideas  in  the  mind 
of  Eve,  excited  by  Satan. 

That  it  cannot  be  regarded  as  an  ./Esopic  fable,  nor  as  a  poetic 
fiction,  when  the  serpent  is  introduced  as  speaking  with  Eve,  is 
evident  (says  Hess)  as  well  from  the  fact  that  what  precedes  and 
succeeds  is  historical,  as  from  the  circumstance  that  the  design  of 
of  the  writer  appears  to  have  been  to  give  a  sensible  representation 
of  a  peculiar  and  highly  important  event. 

The  principal  explanations  of  this  history  which  are  collected  in 
Eichhorn's  Urgeschichte,  edited  by  Gabler,  are  the  following  : 

1  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  420.  2  Eichhorn's  Urgeschichte,  B.  II.  Th.  1. 

S.  271. 

3  Sup.  cit.  p.377,  where  more  accurate  views  of  this  interpretation  are  given. 


<J  55.]  OB'  THE  FALL  OF  MAN.  345 

1 .  Tlmt  which  regards  it  as  really  historical,  and  receives  the 
whole,  or  some  parts  of  it,  as  historically  true. 

2.  That  which  views  it  as  a  historical  mythus  or  fable  ;  i.  e.  as  a 
fictitious  narrative  founded  on  some  historical  fact. 

3.  That  which  makes  it  a  history  derived  from  the  hieroglyphic 
figures. 

4.  Others  regard  it  as  an  allegory,  or  a  philosophical  fable, 
either  founded  on  some  fact,  or  not,  the  object  of  which  is  to  repre- 
sent either  the  origin  of  sin  through  the  predominance  of  sense  over 
reason,  or  the  loss  of  the  golden  age,  or  the  transition  of  men  from 
instinct  to  the  use  of  rational  liberty,  or  the  pernicious  effects  of  a 
longing  after  a  higher  condition,  or  perhaps  several  of  these  ideas  at 
the  same  lime. 

III.  Gen.  2:  17.3:3,  11. 

IV.  Although  Eve  appears  to  have  attributed  the  seductive  con- 
versation, to  the  natural  serpent  and  not  to  the  devil,  still  she  might 
have  resisted  the  influence  of  an  unknown  seducer,  as  well  as  if  he 
had  been  known.  And  such  resistance  she  did  for  a  while,  actually 
make  (ch.  3:  2,  3.)  But  it  was  not  even  by  an  unknown  enemy 
that  Adam  was  tempted  (1  Tim  2:  14.;)  but  he  yielded  to  the  in- 
fluence of  his  wife,  and  ate  of  the  forbidden  fruit.  Gen.  3: 6,  12, 17. 


SECTION   LV. 

Other  effects  of  the  fall  on  our  first  parents  and  their  'posterity. 

But  these  were  not  the  only  consequences  of  the  disobedience  of 
our  first  parents.  For  this  single(l)  transgression  produced  a  dis- 
order [arc<^/a](2,)  and  this  gave  rise  to  a  sinful  disposition  of  their 
whole  nature,  which  became  itself  a  foundation  of  other  transgres- 
sions.(3)  Moreover,  this  sinful  disposition  [??  ctfiagila  Rom.  5:  12] 
was  propagated  by  this  one(4)  individual,  Adam,  (to  whom  also  it  is 
peculiarly  attributed,^  over  the  whole  (5)  human  family ;  and 
through  the  instrumentality  of  this  sinful  disposition  [dia  zfjg  afiug- 
Tiag'\  death  has  been  entailed  on  the  whole  race  of  man.  It  was  in 
this  way  [oviwgor  did  T^g  dfiagzlag']  that  death,  which  would  not 
have  befallen  man  in  a  state  of  innocence,  was  extended  to  the 
whole  human  family  ;  because,  on  account  of  [^V  V — ]  ^he  sinful 
propensity  which  is  common  to  all,  all  are  treated  as  sinful  creatures, 
44 


346  or  MAN.  [bk.  hi. 


and  subjected  to  the  penalty  of  the  violated  law. (6)  All  who  are 
subjected  to  mortality,  have  this  sinful  disposition,  on  account  of 
which  man  is  treated  as  a  sinful  creature,  and  subjected  to  death. (7) 
But  many  persons  die  before  they  could  have  imitated  the  examples 
of  others,  or  have  acquired  the  habit  of  sinning.  Consequently, 
that  sinful  disposition  from  which  our  mortality  results,(8)  must  ex- 
ist prior  to  such  imitation  or  habit ;  and  hence,  although  it  gradu- 
ally acquires  more  strength  through  the  imitation  of  the  wicked  ex- 
amples of  others,  and  is  confirmed  by  habits  of  transgression,  still 
the  disposition  itself  must  be  seated  more  deeply  in  our  nature,  and 
is  even  brought  with  us  into  the  world. (9)  As  the  constitution  of 
human  nature  is  such  that  parents  beget  children  in  their  own  like- 
ness,(lO)it  was  natural,(ll)  that  after  those  perfect  dispositions 
and  faculties  with  which  man  was  created  had  been  disordered  by 
sin,  the  descendants  of  Adam  would  be  born,  not  with  perfect,  but 
with  disordered  dispositions  and  faculties.(12)  It  was  accordant 
with  the  laws  of  nature,  that  man  being  possessed  of  a  sinful  dispo- 
sition [oapl,]  should  beget  children  in  like  manner  inclined  to  evi?. 
(John  3:  6.)  Hence, (13)  the  man  Jesus,  who  was  to  be  free  from 
all  imperfection,(14)  was  not  born(15)  in  the  ordinary  way,  i.  e. 
was  not  begotten  by  a  human  father.(l6) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Rom.  5:  16,  to  xg7f*a  i^  ivos,  sc.  nagajiTOjfiaTog.  Compare  r, 
15,  rw  zov  ivog  naQauKa^aTLXhe  punishment  of  one  offence — was 
«nto  condemnation.  It  is  evident  from  this  passage  that  sin  and 
•death  cannot  be  derived  from  an  original  imperfection  of  human  na- 
ture which  was  entailed  by  Adam  on  his  posterity  ;  for  sin  and  death 
are  here  declared  to  be  tlie  consequence  of  one  sin,  namely  that  of 
Adam.^ 

II.  Gen.  3:  7,  11.  In  the  work  on  the  object  of  the  death  of 
Christ  (p.  649,)  the  author  has  defended  tfie  hypothesis  that  the 
eating  of  the  forbidden  fruit,  did  itself  produce  this  disorder  [ara^/av,] 
which  consisted,  in  general,  in  a  proneness  to  gratify  the  inordinate, 
impetuous  propensities.^ 

i  See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  635. 

2  De  Maree's  Vindication  of  God  in  the  permission  of  evil,  pt.  I.  p.  IKl.  Heil- 
mann's  Compend.  Theol.  Dogm.  §  168, 164.  Jacobi's  Essays  on  the  wise  pur- 
poses of  God,  Pt.  IV.  p.  17. 


"5  55.]  OF  THE  FALL  OF  MAN.  347 

III.  In  the  work  on  the  object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  (p.  641 
— 645)  it  is  proved  that  tJ  dfiaQxia  [sin]  is  used,  in  Rom.  5:  12,  by 
metonymy,  to  designate  the  cause  of  sin,  or  the  source  of  individual 
transgressions. 

IV.  Rom.  5:  1 2,  dv  ivog  av^gwnov,  sc.  '^dccfi  by  the  sin  of  one 
man,  i.  e.  Adam,  corap.  1  Cor.  15:  21,  dt  ccv&gMnov  [sc.  '^ddfi  v. 
22j  0  'd^dvavog  by  man  i.  e.  by  Adam,  death  came. 

V.  In  Rom.  5;  12  we  find  itgxov  Koofiov  mio  the  world  ;  and 
instead  of  this  phrase,  in  v.  18  is  used  the  phrase  dg  ndvzag  dv- 
^Qtonovg  to  all  men. 

VI.  Rom.  5:  12,  lap  c5  ndvxig  rifia^TOv  because  all  have  sinned. 
In  the  dissertation  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus  (p.  640), 
these  words  are  thus  explained  :  "  because  all  are  regarded  and 
treated  as  persons  who  have  sinned.*'  The  same  idea  is  expressed 
by  the  words  i^fiaQTrjawg  tao^at  "  I  will  be  regarded  and  treated  as 
the  transgressor,"  in  Gen.  44:  32 ;  and  in  Job  9:  29,  by  the  word 
5>^nN ,  and  darj^ng  eific  by  the  LXX.  This  explanation  of  the  word 
ijfiaQTOv  as  signifying  "  were  regarded  and  treated  as  sinners,"  viz. 
by  imputation,  accords  perfectly  with  the  phrase  etg  ndvtag  dv&gw- 
novg  eig  xaidxQifia  upon  all  men  unto  condemnation  (v.  18),  by 
which  the  same  idea  is  meant  to  be  expressed,  and  with  the  words 
dfiagrcokoi  xazeavd&Tjaccv  ot  nolXoi  many  were  constituted  sinners, 
i.  e.  by  imputation  (v.  19).^  For  xaz€GTd&fjaav  is  equivalent  to 
iyivovTo — yivea&at — esse,  fieri — existimari,  to  be  regarded  or  con- 
sidered.^ 

VII.  Rom.  5:  12,  did  ZTJg  dfiagzlag  6  d^avarog — ovzojg  6  ^dva- 
tog — di^k&ev,  Icp'  w  ndvztg  rjf^agzov  death  by  sin — thus  death  (came 
upon  all) — because  all  sinned,  i.  e.  were  regarded  as  sinners. 
"  Death  is  the  consequence  of  depravity.  This  depravity  is  there- 
fore as  extensive  among  men  as  death  is."  (p.  640.) 

VIII.  Little  children  also  are  depraved. — "  Since  Paul  des- 
cribes death  as  purely  the  consequence  of  depravity  and  nothing 
else ;  it  follows  that,  as  little  children  die  they  must  also  be  depra- 
ved ;  although  this  depravity  is  observable  only  when  they  become 
acquainted  with  laws,  and  with  objects  for  which  they  have  a  natu- 
ral desire.  Hence,  it  is  evident  that  the  depravity  of  men  is  not 
the  result  of  bad  example  or  of  education,  nor  of  the  premature 
growth  of  our  sensual  propensities  before  the  maturity  of  reason. "^ 
(p.  645.) 

IX.  Innate  depravity. — Psalm  51:  7,  with  a  sinful  nature  [lilS'J 
I  was  born,  yea,  even  in  my  mother's  womb  I  was  possessed  of  it. 
In  the  work  on  the  death  of  Christ  (p.  645),  this  interpretation  is^ 


1  Sup.  cit.  p.  636  etc.  Note 

2  Observv.  p.  14. 


348  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

vindicated  against  another  which  makes  David  merely  mean,  that 
he  was  an  old,  hardened  sinner.  And  in  the  Dissertations  on  the 
historical  books  of  the  New  Test,  we  have  remarked,  in  comment- 
ing on  John  9:  34,  that  the  words  tv  d^agilaig  gv  tyswri&rig  oko?, 
may  well  be  taken  in  their  proper  sense :  "  you  were  born  in  a  sin- 
ful state  (as  this  bodily  deformity,  your  blindness,  proves)." 

Kant  has  asserted,  that  among  all  the  representations  of  the  prop- 
agation of  moral  evil,  that  is  the  most  objectional  by  which  it  is  re- 
garded as  being  inherited  from  our  first  parents:  for,  says  he,  in  ref- 
erence to  moral  evil,  we  can  say,  "  quae  non  fecimus  ipsi,  vix  ea 
nostra  puto,"  i.  e.  what  we  have  not  done  ourselves,  can  scarcely 
be  regarded  as  our  own.  In  reply  to  this,  we  remark,^  Just  as  a 
particular  natural  or  innate  disposition  or  temperament,  renders  it 
more  difficult  for  some  men  to  fulfil  the  law,  than  others ;  so  also  it' 
is  by  no  means  impossible  that  an  undue  propensity  for  the  objects 
of  sense  {§  56)  may  have  been  inherited  from  Adam  by  all  his 
posterity,  which  renders  it,  if  not  impossible,  yet  very  difficult  for 
them  to  fulfil  the  law.  This  innate  disposition,  which  is  involuntary 
in  us,  and  which  renders  it  difficult  for  us  to  obey  the  law,  is  not 
(as  Kant's  objection  presupposes)  imputed  to  us  as  sin  ;  but  the 
guilt  with  which  we  are  charged  lies  in  this,  that  we  do  not  sur- 
mount the  difficulties  which  arise  from  it  (<5>  56.) 

X.  1  Cor,  15:  48,  as  the  earthly,  such  are  the  earthly.  Gen. 
5:  3,  Adam  begat  children  in  his  own  likeness  [im^'ia  "i^^^S  ] 

XI.  The  propagation  of  this  depravity  is  the  natural  result  of  a 
law  of  our  nature,  which  is  in  itself  salutary  (Gen.  1:  28.)  And 
the  unhappy  effects  of  this  law,  on  tJie  descendants  of  Adam,  can 
no  more  be  charged  on  the  Author  of  nature,  than  that  misery  can, 
which,  in  the  course  of  the  operation  of  these  laws,  is  entailed  on  the 
innocent  children  of  such  parents  as  have  by  their  wicked  life  con- 
tracted a  hereditary  disease. 

XLI.  In  no  other  way  than  by  the  natural  inheritance  of  the 
sinful  propensities  of  parents,  by  the  children,  could  the  necessity  of 
dying  have  been  extended  to  all  men  on  account  of  the  individual 
act  of  transgression  by  Adam  (Rom.  5:  15 — 17.)  For  it  was  from 
this  one  sin,  that  the  sinful  disposition  of  Adam  proceeded  ;  and 
through  him  this  disposition,  which  involves  the  necessity  of  death, 
was  propagated  over  the  whole  human  family.  This  is  the  only  in- 
terpretation which  accords  with  the  declaration  of  Paul  (Rom.  5: 
X2 — 19,)  that  d^aQxia  [depravity,]  and  through  a/<apr/«,  death, 
were  entailed  on  the  whole  human  family.  Moreover,  the  doctrine 
of  the  propagation  of  depravity  by  natural  generation  from  Adam, 
is  closely  connected  with  the  important  doctrine  of  the  gracious 


1  Kantii  Phil.  Annot.  p.  8. 


§  55.]  OF  THE  FALL  OF  MAN.  349 

provision  of  God  for  the  redemption  of  the  human  family,  and  in 
various  points  of  view,  tends  to  throw  much  light  upon  this  subject.^ 
Jost  is  disposed  almost  totally  to  reject  the  connexion  between 
the  propositions  di^'  ivog  avOQunov  ri  dfiUQila,  xai  diu  ttJq  d^ugtiati 
0  x^avaxog,  i.  e.  the  connexion  between  the  mortality  of  mankind 
and  the  first  sin  of  Adam,  through  the  instrumentality  of  universal 
dfiaQTia,  "sin  or  depravity,"  which  Paul  maintains.  He  supposes 
that  the  object  of  the  apostle  in  this  passage  was,  to  meet  the  ob- 
jection which  might  possibly  be  urged,  that  if  mankind  had  actually 
been  reconciled  to  God  through  Christ,  they  would  necessarily  be 
delivered  from  death,  it  being  a  punishment  of  sin  ;  and  to  prove 
that  death  cannot  properly  be  regarded  as  a  punishment,  at  least 
not  in  every  instance  ;  and  that  men  might  certainly  be  mortal 
without  being  deserving  of  punishment.  The  prominent  idea  which 
he  supposes  to  be  contained  in  the  12th  and  subsequent  verses,  he 
expresses  thus :  '^  Adam  sinned — the  punishment  of  his  sin  was 
death,  and  this  became,  in  some  sense,  a  general  punishment  which 
was  inflicted  on  all  men,  and  which  could  not  well  be  dispensed 
with,  because  God  had  found  it  necessary  to  connect  it  with  Adam's 
sin." 

XIII.  See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  653 
etc.  Note  t,  and  De  Maree  sup.  cit.  p.  324—329. 

XIV.  2  Cor.  5:  2i,  he  that  knew^  not  sin.  1  John  3:  5,  there 
is  no  sin  in  him.  1  Pet.  3:  18,  Christ  suffered  the  just  for  the  un- 
just. Here  Christ,  as  the  only  just  person,  is  distinguished  from 
those  for  whom  he  suffered,  i.  e.  from  all  mankind  (<§>  66,)  they 
being  in  comparison  with  him  declared  not  as  just,  but  unjust.  1 
Pet.  1:19,  ccfxpov  d(.io}(.iov  nal  danlkov  XgiOTOv  Christ,  the  lamb, 
without  blemish  and  without  spot.  Heb.  7:  26,  oocog,  dxcacog, 
auiavvog,  TiE'ji^MQiG^tvog  ccno  imp  df^aQTcoXcop  holy,  innocent,  unde- 
filed,  and  separated  from  sinners. 

XV.  Luke  1:  34  etc.  compare  Matt.  1:  16—20,  25.     See  §  75. 

XVI.  In  the  Dissertation  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christy 
it  is  maintained  that  the  universality  of  depravity  results  from  the^ 
circumstance  that  all  are  descended  ultimately  from  one  (father)  by 
whom  they  are  begotten  [Adam  ;]  and  that  therefore  this  depravity 
is  always  traced  to  Adam,  and  not  to  Eve. 

^1  See  §§  55,59,65,73,116.  Compare  the  Dissertation  on  the  practical  im- 
portance of  the  doctrine  concerning  the  gracious  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit^ 
§  8.  b. 


350  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 


SECTION    LVI. 

More  particular  view  of  this  innate  depravity. 

This  natural  depravity(l)  consists  in  inordinate  and  violent  pro- 
pensities to  the  objects  and  pleasures  of  sense  ;^  propensities  which 
"  war"  against  reason  and  conscience,(2)  against  that  which  accords 
with  the  law  of  God  and  with  propriety,  Rom.  7:  16,  22,  25.  It 
therefore  consists  in  a  preponderance  of  the  propensities  of  our  na- 
ture for  the  objects  and  pleasures  of  sense,  which  nnay  indeed,  for  a 
while,  remain  unobserved  ;  but  will  immediately  manifest  itself,(3) 
so  soon  as  our  reason  and  ability  to  discriminate  between  right  and 
wrong,  begin  to  be  unfolded.  This  preponderance  is  evinced  by 
so  great  an  aversion (4)  to  the  law  of  God, (5)  that  we  are  enticed 
by  the  law  itself  to  resist  its  injunctions,  and  are,  as  it  were,  chal- 
lenged to  direct  our  attention  and  exert  our  agency  in  reference  to 
objects,  of  which  we  should  not  have  thought,  had  it  not  been  for 
the  intervention  of  the  law  ;(6)  in  short,  it  discovers  itself  by  a  de- 
cided(7)  inclination(8)  to  that  which  is  sinful  and  forbidden. (9) 
We  must  indeed  first  voluntarily  submit(lO)  ourselves  to  the  do- 
minion of  these  inordinate  propensities,  before  this  unlawful  and  de- 
fective(ll)  inclination  of  our  nature  can  be  charged  to  our  account ; 
we  must  first  cherish  these  lawless  propensities,(  12)  or  evince(  13) 
our  voluntary  obedience  to  them  by  our  actions. (14)  But  so  great 
is  the  influence  which  this  preponderance  of  the  propensities  for  the 
objects  and  pleasures  of  sense  has  upon  man,(15)  that  it  sometimes 
prevents  him  from  approving  and  embracing  the  truth, (16)  and 
sometimes,  in  defiance  of  his  better  knowledge,  hurries  him  into 
sin. (17)  And  even  those  who,  by  the  grace  of  God,  have  been  de- 
livered from  the  dominion  of  this  innate  depravity, (18)  are  still  sub- 
ject to  this  defective  inclination  of  our  nature  ;(19)  they  must  carry 
on  a  constant  warfare  (20)  lest  they  relapse  under  the  dominion  of 


[1  There  is  no  word  in  the  English  language  which  corresponds  exactly  toj 
sintdichy  and  Sinrdichkeit  in  the  German.  SensJial  has  too  much  of  the  idea  of! 
carnal,  and  sensation  too  little.  "  Sense,"  as  distinguished  from  reason,  in  thej 
phrase  "  pleasures  of  sense,"  comes  nearest  to  it ;  but  the  German  word  morei 
distinctly  includes  the  idea  that  they  are  of  an  inferior,  sinful  nature.  S.] 


^56.]  INNATE  DEPRAVITY.  351 

^  this  natural  depravity.     This  conflict  retards  and  renders  difficult 
their  progress  in  sanctification  ;(21)  and  as  the  result  is  often  so  dis- 
iastrous,  frequently  affixes  many  a  stain  to  the  piety  of  the  best  of 
f  men.  (22) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Depravity ;    tj  d^aQila. — Rom.  5:  12.  7:  8  etc.  6:  12.  Man, 
las  far  as  he  is  affected  with  this  innate  depravity,  or  as  far  as  it  is  a 

fountain  of  sin  in  him  [oli^il  tv  atrco  ?J  dfAUQTia  Rom.  7:  17,]  is  cal- 
I  led  aug^  flesh.  Thus  in  ch.  7:  25,  Paul  says,  ttJ  aagxl  dovXevca 
I  vofAO)  dfiuQTlag  "  I  follow  the  inclination  of  my  (mnate)  depravity 
[a«(>x/,]  in  as  far  as  I  am  affected  by  it."  And  in  v.  18,  ovk  ohil 
Iv  i^ol,  Tovr  taiLv  tv  rij  aapyci  fiov,  ctyaOov  in  me,  as  far  as  I  am 
GOQ^  [flesh  or  depraved,]  dwelleth  nothing  good. — Thus  also  in 
Matt.  26:  41,  Christ  calls  man  adg^,  d(Ut6frjg,  in  as  far  as  he  is 
flesh,  i.  e.  weak  to  that  which  is  good  (Rom.  5:  6,  da'&evfjg'  v.  8^ 
ufxaQxcalog) — weak  in  spirit  nvevixa — weak  in  the  inner  man  Iv  tw 
ico)  dvd^gmnov  or  vovg  (7:  22,  23,  25);  and  on  the  contrary,  inclined 
to  evil,  easily  led  astray  elg  nfigaafiov  iig^'gxfrac  (James  1:  4.)  But 
this  sinful  propensity  itself,  which  is  the  source  of  sin  (Gal.  5:  19,) 
i.  e.  the  ce^apr/a,  is  called  adg'^^  flesh ;  and  hence  those  who  obey 
these  lusts  are  termed  fleshly,  aagyitxol  (Rom.  7:  14,)  or,  which 
amounts  to  the  same  idea,  ol  xarcc  adgxa  ovieg — ol  ev  aagTil  ovieg 
they  that  are  according  to  the  flesh  (Rom.  8:  5.)  As  our  innate 
depravity  is  primarily  seated  in  the  body,  it  is,  though  the  mind  is 
decidedly  affected  by  it,  called  flesh  or  body,  [od^^  or  aojfia ,]  for 
these  two  words  are  interchanged  with  one  another.  Rom.  8:  IS, 
comp.  Gal.  5:  19,  24. 

II.  Rom.  7:  15,  17,  19 — 21,  23,  the  law  in  my  members  wars 
against  the  law  (or  dictates)  of  my  reason. 

III.  Rom  7:  8,  9,  when  the  law  came,  my  depravity  revived. — - 
See  ^  55.  111.  8. 

IV.  Rom.  8:  7.  7:  13. 

V.  Rom.  7:  10,  12  etc.  the  commandment  unto  life  is  good. 

VI.  Rom.  7:  5,  8,  without  the  law  sin  is  dead. 

VII.  Rom.  7:  18,  23.  8:  7.  Gal.  5:  17. 

VIII.  Gal.  5:  16,  etc.  im&vfxia  aagxag  the  lust  of  the  flesh,  v. 
24,  ^  adg'§  avv — lalg  ini&vfiiaig,  the  flesh  with  the  lusts.  Rom.  7: 
5,  ra  na&tJinuTtt  Toiv  dfxuQTiojv  the  motions  or  desires  of  sin.  6:  12. 
Ephes.  2:  3.  4:  22,  o  naXaiog  dv&gouTiog  d  (pd^eigofievog  xazd  rdg 
im&vfilag  trig  dndrrjg,  the  old  man  that  is  corrupted  by  deceitful 
Justs.     James  11:  14. 


I  Gal.  5:  16, 17, 13.  Rom.  8:67. 


352  OF    MAN.  [bK.  III. 

IX.  Many  things  have  the  appearance  of  being  good,  and  yet, 
in  truth,  are  inconsistent  with  the  law  of  God.  Such  specious  works 
of  philanthropy  and  holiness  are  rejected  by  our  Saviour,  Matt.  5: 
1,5;  and  by  Paul,  in  I  Cor.  13:  3,  and  though  I  bestow  away  all 
my  goods,  and  though  I  give  ray  body  to  be  burned,  and  have  not 
love,  it  profiteth  me  nothing. 

X.  Rom.  6:  12,  vnaxoveiv  ztj  dfiafjtict  to  obey  (the  solicitations 
of)  sin.  Gen.  4:  7,  *'  Sin  is  lying  in  wait  for  you,  and  desires  that 
you  should  obey  her  will ;  but  rule  thou  over  her."  James  1:  15, 
?J  tni&u^iu  GvllapovGu  tIkiii  a^uQilav  when  lust  hath  conceived,  it 
bringeth  forth  sin. 

XL  The  desires  or  motions  of  sin  [primi  motus,  as  they  were 
called  by  the  scholastic  divines]  which  proceed  from  an  evil  and  de- 
fective source  (Rom.  7:  18,  13,)  are  themselves  sinful — na&i^f^aza 

That  tendency  of  our  nature  by  which  the  performance  of  our 
duty  is  rendered  so  difficult,  is  defective  or  wrong,  and  must  be  re- 
garded as  such,  although  it  is  inherited  by  the  descendants  of  Adam 
and  is  not  the  consequence  of  their  own  acts.  For  they  were  not 
thus  created  by  the  Author  of  our  nature,  but  this  depraved  ten- 
dency is  the  consequence  of  the  voluntary  guilt  of  our  first  parents 
in  whom,  previously  to  their  fall,  there  was  no  such  preponderant 
propensity  for  the  objects  and  pleasures  of  sense. 

XII.  Sins  in  thought  are  criminal. — Although  our  sinful  desires 
may  remain  enclosed  in  the  breast,  they  are  still  charged  to  man's 
account  and  render  him  deserving  of  punishment  (int&vfAia  pro-, 
duces  death  {^dvatog  Rom.  7:7,8,10.)  There  are  also  other 
passages  of  the  sacred  volume  in  which  internal  feelings  are  de- 
clared sinful  and  deserving  of  punishment.  Rom.  1:  28 — 32.  Col. 
3:  5,  6.  Gal.  5:  19—21.  Matt.  5:  22. 

XIII.  Gal.  5:  17,  16,  noteJv — leXilt/  im^vfiiav  aagnog  to  do — 
fulfil  the  lust  of  the  flesh. 

XIV.  Rom.  6:  13,  19,  do  not  yield  your  members  to  sin  as 
instruments  of  unrighteousness — to  uncleanness  and  to  iniquity. — ► 
Ephes.  2:  3. 

XV.  Rom.  7:  14,  23,  iyoj  fi/At  -na-nfjafitvog  vno  rriv  dfiagrlav — 

0  vofio?  iv  Tolg  fxileGi  {aov  ulyjiaUorl^et  ^s   tm  v6f.iw  Ttjg  df,iaQxiag 

1  am  sold  under  sin — the  law  in  my  members  brings  me  into  cap- 
tivity to  the  law  of  sin. 

XVI.  1  Cor.  2:  14,  ^w/ti/iog  uvx^goynog  ov  8txfxav  ra  roy  nviv- 
fAUTog  Tov  x^80v  •'  man  in  his  natural  state  does  not  believe  in  the 
gospel."  See  the  explanation  of  this  passage  in  the  Dissertation  on 
the  influences  of  grace,  <§>  3. 

XVII.  Rom.  7:  15,  for  I  know  not  what  I  do— for  that  which  I 
would,  I  do  not,  but  that  which  I  hate,  I  do. 

XVIII.  Rom.  6:  14.  8;  2.  Gal.  5:  16. 


§  57.]  INNATE  DEPRAV^ITV.  353 

XIX.  Gal.  5:  17.  Rom.  6:  12,  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the 
spirit. 

XX.  Rom.  8:  13,  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  body,  by  the 
spirit,  6:  12  etc. 

XXI.  Phil.  3:  12,  13,  ovx  on  7J$tj  reTslelwfiai  I  am  not  already 
perfect. 

XXII.  Gal.  6:  1 — 5,  ft  doxfl  tig  (rwv  nvsvfiariicojv)  flvac  ti,  fttjSeif 
wi/,  iavTOv  qgevanaza  if  any  one  (of  the  spiritual)  thinketh  he  is 
something,  and  is  nothing,  he  deceiveth  himself.  1  John  1:  7  etc. 
2:  1,  12.  See  on  these  passages,  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the 
Gospel  and  Epistles  of  John,  where  the  passages  1  John  3:  6, 8  etc. 
5:  18,  which  appear  to  contradict  the  others,  are  explained.  Prov. 
20:  9,  who  can  say,  I  am  clean  from  sin  ?  Eccles.  7:  20,  thus  is 
there  not  a  just  man  on  earth  that  doeth  (exclusively)  good  and 
sinneth  not. 

In  1  John  1:  7  etc.  2:  1,  the  expressions  a^a^raW^v  and  a^apr/a 
(to  sin,  and  sin)  refer  to  individual  acts  of  transgression  ;  but  in  1 
John  3:  6,  9.  5:  18.  3:  8,  dficxgrlav  noteTp,  a^agravftv  (to  do  acts  of 
sin,  to  sin)  signify  a  disorderly  habit  of  life.  The  latter  passages 
probably  refer  to  the  Gnostic  morality  of  the  Cerinthians,  who  be- 
lieved that  the  soul  would  not  have  to  account  for  the  acts  of  li- 
centiousness and  prostitution  committed  by  the  body.^ 


SECTION  LVir 

Effect  of  natural  depravity  on  our  state  in  the  future  world. 

The  fact  that  all  mankind  are  indiscriminately  subject  to  mortali- 
ty as  well  as  Adam  was  (§  54,)  proves,  that  though  mankind  are 
not  themselves  to  be  blamed  for  being  born  with  a  depraved  nature, 
they  are  nevertheless  regarded  as  creatures  possessed  of  a  sinful  na- 
ture (and  such  in  truth  they  are,)  and  are  subject  to  a  participation 
in  the  punishment  which  was  inflicted  on  Adam. (1)  For,  the  reason 
why  all  men  must  die,  is,  because  all  are  treated  as  sinful  creatures 
(jifiagiov  Rom.  5:  12.  •§>  55.  111.  6).     Now  it  is  evident,  even  from 

-  [I  According  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  which  is  ably  supported  in  Storr's 
work,  these  disputed  passages  are  divested  of  all  difficulty,  and  may  be  transla- 
ted thus  :  Whosoever  abideih  in  him,  liveth  not  in  sin  ;  whosoever  liveth  in  sin, 
bath  not  seen  him  neither  known  him  (1  John  3:  6.)  Whosoever  is  born  of  God 
doth  not  live  in  sin  ;  for  his  seed  (see  1  Pet.  1:  23)  remaineth  in  him  ;  and  he 
cannot  live  in  sin  because  he  is  born  of  God  (1  John  3:  9.)  We  know  that 
whosoever  is  born  of  God,  liveth  not  in  sin  etc.  ch.  5:  18.  S.] 

45 


354  OF  MAN.  [bk.  UU 

the  diversity  between  the  body  and  soul  of  man,  that  the  death  of 
the  body  does  not  necessarily  involve  the  death  of  the  soul  (Matt. 
10:  28).  On  the  contrary,  the  constitution  of  our  moral  nature  ex- 
cites in  us  the  expectation  (Rom.  2:  15  etc.  §  17,  18,  24),  that 
our  soul  will  survive  the  dissolution  of  the  body.  Moreover  it  is 
inconsistent  with  the  holiness  and  justice  of  God  (2),  to  suppose 
that  it  should  be  impossible  for  those  who  had  been  labouring  in 
this  world  to  improve  in  moral  excellence,  and  who  had  really  made 
some  small  advances  in  holiness,  to  make  still  father  progress  in 
the  work  of  sanctification  ;  that  those  who  laboured  daily  to  subdue 
their  inclination  to  sin,  should  eventually  be  blotted  out  of  existence  ; 
and  that  all  human  happiness  should  be  confined  within  the  limits 
of  the  present  life,  in  which  the  prosperity  of  the  virtuous  is  often 
surpassed  by  that  of  the  wicked.  But  this  necessary  belief  in  the 
future  existence  of  the  human  soul,  gives  rise  to  the  apprehension, 
that  just  as  the  body  is  subjected  to  mortality  on  account  of  innate 
depravity(3),  so  also  the  soul,  which  survives  the  dissolution  of  the 
body,  may  likewise  be  treated  as  the  soul  of  a  sinful  creature.  Nay, 
it  is  undoubtedly  true,  that  those  who  abuse  the  gracious  influence 
of  God,  which  was  given  to  aid  them  in  the  pursuit  of  holiness,  and 
perseveringly  obey  the  unlawful  propensities  of  their  depraved  na- 
ture, will,  on  account  of  their  depravity(4),  be  exposed  to  the  pen- 
alty of  the  divine  law. (5)  But  even  those  who  have  actually  re- 
pented and  reformed,  and  who  may  justly  entertain  pleasing  antici- 
pations of  the  salutary  effects  of  their  reformation,  can  still  not  ex- 
pect a  future  happiness  of  their  spirit,  unmingled  with  pain,  as  well 
on  account  of  their  sinful  conduct  previously  to  their  change,  as  of 
the  indolence  in  their  conflict  with  the  sinful  propensities  of  their 
nature  of  which  they  have  since  then  been  guilty,  unless  a  pardon 
of  their  sins  is  provided  for  them. (6)  And  even  the  souls  of  those 
who,  on  account  of  their  innate  depravity  (<5>  55,)  die  in  their  in- 
fancy, although  they  are  themselves  innocent,  still  participate  in 
some  degree  in  the  punishment  inflicted  on  Adam,  inasmuch  as  they 
are  justly  regarded  unworthy  to  be  fellow-members  of  the  society 
of  angels  and  the  just  made  perfect  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and 
partakers  of  the  blessedness(7)  which  they  enjoy. 


^  57.]  INNATE  DEPRAVITY.  355 


Illustrations. 

I.  Meaning  of  the  word  punishment  as  applied  to  this  subject, 
Rom.  5:  18,  eis  xccrdxgtfAa  to  condemnation.  The  meaning  of  the 
word  punishment,  when  applied  to  the  sin  of  Adam  as  imputed  to 
his  posterity,  is  thus  defined  in  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death 
of  Christ  (p.  585,  657  :)  "  Punishment  does  not  in  this  instance 
signify  sufferings  which  we  have  ourselves  deserved,  but  sufferings 
which  are  entailed  upon  us  in  consequence  of  a  judicial  sentence  on 
account  of  sin."  "  It  is  the  consequence  of  punishment,  and  it  is 
also  itself  punishment  in  this  respect,  that  the  judge  foresaw  this 
consequence  and  nevertheless  decreed  the  punishment."^ 

II.  Matt.  5:  6,  blessed  are  they  which  do  hunger  and  thirst  after 
righteousness,  for  they  shall  be  filled.  Rom.  2:  6 — 10.  2  Thess.  I: 
4  etc.  The  first  of  these  passages  contains  an  important  evidence 
for  the  immortality  of  the  soul ;  for  Christ  intimates,  that  the  most 
noble  exertions  after  moral  purity  would  be  unhappy  exertions  in- 
deed, if  their  object  could  not  be  attained,  yea  if  the  possibility  of 
attaining  it  might  not  be  supposed  to  be  secured  by  God,  who  im- 
planted in  our  breasts  this  holy  desire.  In  the  work  De  vita  beata,^ 
we  have  made  the  following  remarks  :  "  The  constitution  of  our 
moral  nature  points  us  to  a  future  existence  of  the  soul ;  nor  can 
we  believe  that  God,  who  is  the  Instructor,  the  Father  of  our  spirits, 
would  suffer  all  the  pleasing  fruits  of  his  paternal  instruction  to  be 
buried  at  once  in  annihilation — and  nothing  but  a  belief  in  a  moral 
government  of  the  world  and  in  the  declarations  of  Holy  Writ,  can 
secure  us  against  doubt&,in  a  matter  which  we  can  never  learn  from 
•the  testimony  of  our  senses."  The  evidence  derived  from  Matt.  5: 
6,  resembles  the  postulate  which  Kant  adopted  relative  to  the  im- 
mortality of  the  soul :  "  Reason  requires  that  we  regard  the  perfect 
conformity  of  the  will  to  the  moral  law,  i.  e.  holiness,  as  possible  j 
but  this  can  possibly  be  attained  only  by  a  process  of  improvement 
which  extends  into  infinity,  and  this  is  possible  only  on  the  assump- 
tion of  an  existence  which  is  likewise  infinite,  i.  e.  only  on  the 
assumption  of  an  immortality." 

III.  Rom.  5:  12.  8:  10,  to  aca^a  veycgov  ^t*  d^uQilav  the  body- 
is  dead  on  account  of  sin. 

IV.  (V.)  Natural  depravity  a  cause  of  our  punishment. — Eph. 
2:  3,  qjvGit,  Ttxva  ogy TJg  by  nature  children  of  wrath.  Le  Clerc  has 
proved,^   that  q)vaig  [nature]   signifies    natural    faculties  and  disr 

1  Reinhardt's  Dogmatik,  S.  653. 

2  Dissert,  de  Vita  beata,  p.  3  sq.  Opusc.  acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  75.  ff. 

3  Ars.  crit.  sect.  I.  c.  7.  §  7.  Vol.  I.  p.  210. 


356  OP  MAN  [bK.  III. 

positions.     The  apostle,  in  the  passage  before  us,  is  not   speaking 
exclusively  of  the  Jews,  but,  as  Koppe^  has  justly  remarked,3he 
embraces  in  the  two  expressions  i]f-u7g — ycal  ol  Xotnoi  we — and  oth- 
ers, or  the  rest,  the  Jews  and  all  other  nations.     He  must,  there- 
fore, here  refer  to  a  natural  state  which  is  common  alike  to  all  men. 
Nature  [(fvaig'j  is  here  equivalent  to  flesh  [o«p§]'2  in  the  beginning 
of  the  verse  (<§>  56.  III.  1)  ;    the  apostle  is  therefore  speaking  of  a 
depraved  natural  condition,  in  which  the  Jews,  on  account  of  their 
wicked  lusts,  had  sinned,  as  well  as  the  other  nations,  inasmuch  as 
they  had  gratified  the  sinful  lusts  of  their  hearts,^  and  had  abandon- 
ed themselves  to  the  depraved  propensities  of  their  nature  so  that 
their  hearts  had  become  fleshly  {(jaQntaogRom.  7:  14],  and  they 
fulfilled  the  will  of  the  flesh  [&sXi']fiDtTa]'^  in  their  life  and  conduct. 
Now  the  Ephesians  had   indeed  rendered  themselves  culpable  and 
obnoxious  to  punishment  ("  children  of   wrath"),   by   voluntarily 
yielding  to  these  sinful  propensities  [toTq  inf&v^ilutg  x^g  aagycog]  and 
planning  their  purposes  and  actions  in  obedience  to  them  [inolovv  ra 
'&skr]ficcTa  T^g  (Jag:i6g  aal  zojv  dtccpoicav.]     But  the   fact,   that  their 
voluntary  obedience  to  the  dictates  of  their  sinful  nature,  and  their 
living  in  accordance  with  them,  exposed  them  to  the  punishment  of 
the  divine  law,  shows  that  they  became  subjects  of  the  divine 
wrath  through   their  depraved   nature  and  the  lusts  of  it.^     Now, 
although  we  must  first  consent  to  the  sinful  dispositions  of  our  na- 
ture, before  we  can  be  culpable,  although  the  guilt  with  which  the 
punishment  [death]  is  connected,  is  only  a  consequence  of  our  own 
consent  (James  1:  15,);  still  we  may  wnth  propriety  say  that  the 
sinful   propensity,  which  invites  us    to   voluntary  obedience,  and 
which,  though   through  our  own   fault,  actually  succeeds  in  every 
case   in  which  we  do  not  avail  ourselves  of  the  divine  assistance  to 
resist  it,  is  the  source  of  the  evil  which  results  from  obedience  to  its 
dictates.     It  may,  therefore,  be  said  of  the  natural  depravity  of  our 
nature,  not  that  it  is  the  exclusive  cause,  but,  in  general,  that  it  is 

'  Excurs.  II.  in  Epist.  ad.  Ephes.  p.  394,  ed.  I. 

2  iv  iTTi&vfiiatg  ring  oaQxrJg — iv  i.  e.  secundum^  comp.  4:  17.  Heb.  10: 10,  and 
other  passages,  thus  the  Heb  n  Gen.  1:  26.  site^sa  ,  see  Schleusner's  Lex.  art,  iv 
No.  26. 

3  iv  TcaQaitrdfiaaiv  aveaxQdqyrjaav — iv  oig  v.  3,  refers  to  TTccQaTtroj/uaai  v.  1 ; 
just  as  iv  aig  v.  2,  does  to  dfiaqriaig  v.  1.  See  Comment,  on  Heb.  9:  10,  Note  c. 

4  rd  d'sXt'ifiara  rijg  oaQxog  xal  xw  Siavotojv  i.e.  roJv  oaquMOJV  Siavotajv. — This 
is  a  hendiadys  of  which  various  other  examples  are  given  in  the  Dissert,  de 
sensu  vocis  jch/QOjfia,  no.  60.  In  the  LXX,  didvoiai  answers  to  naV  (aV)Num. 
15:  39.  Jtdvotat  xdi  od^^,  therefore,  here  means  "  animos,  qui  tales  sunt, 
quales  natura  esse  solent." 

5  This  may  serve  as  a  refutation  of  Koppe's  remark  on  Ephes.  2:  3  (Nov.  Test. 
Vol.  I.  p.  392),  that  q>v'atg  does  not  mean  innate  depravity,  because  an  abandoned 
life  and  conduct  are  spoken  of  in  the  context,  i.  e.  voluntary  acts  of  transgression^ 
which  are  alone  deserving  of  punishment. 


^  57.]  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.  357 

the  cause  of  sin,  and  of  the  punishment  consequent  on  sin  ;  or  to 
use  the  language  of  the  apostle  Paul,  (Rom.  8:  2,)  that  it  is  vofio^ 
trjg  dfAagiiag  aal  tov  '^avccrov,  i.  e.  the  law  of  sin  and  death,  or,  a 
law  which  is  the  cause  of  sin  and  of  the  punishment  which  follows 
it.i 

VI.  In  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  (p.  578, 
586,)  we  have  unfolded  and  dwelt  upon,  the  idea, "  that,  according 
to  the  strict  principles  of  the  divine  justice,  even  those  who  have 
repented  and  reformed,  could  not  expect  a  state  of  happiness  in  the 
future  world,  but  a  condition  approximating  nearly  to  this  life,  being 
mingled  with  pleasure  and  pain." 

VII.  See  the  Dissertation  on  the  death  of  Christ  (p.  584,  504, 
688),  where  is  this  remark  :  *<  The  fact  that  little  children,  even  in 
their  most  tender  infancy,  have  a  depravity  in  them  which  renders 
them  unfit  for  the  society  of  uncorrupted,  holy  spirits  in  heaven,  is  a 
consequence  of  that  act  by  which  Adam  ruined  not  only  his  own 
sinful  nature  but  also  that  of  his  descendants."^ 

1  On  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  644. 

[2  Upon  the  important  subject  of  the  natural  depravity  of  man,  its  imputation, 
and  consequences,  the  intelligent  reader  will  be  pleased  to  see  the  language  of 
other  high  ecclesiastical  authorities.  In  the  venerable  Augustan  Confession, 
the  mother  symbol  of  Protestantism  (Art.  II.  de  peccati  origine),  we  read,  "  Idem 
decent,  quod  post  lapsum  Adae  omnes  homines  secundum  naturam  propagati 
nascantur  cum  peccato,  hoc  est,  sine  metu  Dei,  sine  fiducia  erga  Deum,  et  cum 
concupiscentia,  quodque  hie  morbus,  seu  vitium  originis  vere  sit  peccatum, 
damnans  et  afferens  nunc  quoque  aeternam  mortem  his  qui  non  renascantur  per 
Baptismum  et  Spiritum  Sanctum."  i.  e.  We  teach  that  after  the  fall  of  Adam, 
all  men  who  are  naturally  born,  are  born  in  sin,  that  is,  born  with  evil  desires, 
and  without  the  fear  of  God,  and  without  faith  in  him  etc.  See  also  Dr.  Loch- 
man's  History  etc.  of  Lutheran  Church,  printed  at  Harrisburg,  1818. 

Dr.  Mosheim  (Elementa  Theol.  Dog.  Vol.  I.  p.  540)  says  "  Haec  corruptio 
naturae  nostrae,  tametsi  involuntaria  sit,  et  a  parentibus  nostris  in  nos  derivata, 
nobis  tamen  in  foro  divino,  tanquam  peccatum,  imputatur.  Quare  si  nullum 
aliud  accederet  peccatum,  propter  hanc  ipsam  corruptionem  nos  poenisdivinis 
obnoxii  essemus,  i.  e.  this  depravity  of  our  nature,  although  it  is  involuntary 
in  us,  and  derived  from  our  first  parents,  is  nevertheless  imputed  to  us  as  sin  in 
the  chancery  of  heaven.  Wherefore,  if  no  other  sin  were  added,  we  should  be 
exposed  to  divine  punishments  on  account  of  this  depravity  itself." 

The  sentiments  of  the  divines  of  New  England  may  be  seen  in  the  following 
extract  from  Dr.  Woods's  Letters  to  Unitarians  etc.  (p.  44,  45).  "  On  this  partic- 
ular point  our  opinions  have  often  been  misrepresented.  We  are  said  to  hold  that 
God  dooms  a  whole  race  of  innocent  creatures  to  destruction,  or  considers  them  all  as 
deserving  destruction,  for  the  sin  of  one  man.  Now,  when  I  examine  the  respecta- 
ble writings  of  the  earlier  Calvinists  generally,  on  the  subject  of  original  sin,  I 
find  nothing  that  resembles  such  a  statement  as  this.  It  is  true,  exceptionable 
language  has  in  some  instances  been  used  ;  and  opinions  which  I  should  think 
erroneous,  have  sometimes  been  entertained  on  this  subject.  But  the  Orthodox 
in  New  England,  at  the  present  day,  are  not  chargeable  with  the  same  fault. — 
The  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  to  his  posterity,  in  any  sense  which  those  words 
naturally  and  properly  convey,  is  a  doctrine  which  we  do  not  believe.  If  any  shall 
say,  that  "  for  God  to  give  Adam  a  posterity  like  himself,  and  to  impute  his  sin  to 
them,  is  one  and  the  same  thing,  I  should  not  object  to  such  an  imputation. — 
But  the  word  imputation  has,  in  my  view,  been  improperly  used  in  relation  to 
this  subject,  and  has  occasioned  unnecessary  perplexity."     S.] 


368  OF  MAN.  [bk.  II r. 


SECTION   LVIII. 

The  magnitude  of  that  misery,  which  those  who  abandon  them- 
selves to  the  propensities  of  their  sinful  nature,  entail  upon  them- 
selves, is  evident  from  the  description  of  the  lot  which  awaits  the 
wicked  in  the  future  world.  We  are  told  that  severe  punishments 
await  them(l);  punishments  which  consist  partly  in  the  consequen- 
ces that  naturally  and  necessarily  follow(2)  a  life  of  servitude  to  sin, 
and  partly  in  such  external  evils  as  the  God  and  Judge  of  the  hu- 
man family  shall  see  fit,  voluntarily  (3)  and  by  his  omnipotence,  to 
inflict(4).  The  latter  (positive)  punishments  include  the  separation 
from  all  holy  beings  and  a  union  with  wicked  spirits(5),  being  sit- 
uated in  a  mournful  and  unhappy  place(6),  a  constitution  of  our 
body  adapted  to  suffer  pain (7),  the  body  being  either  raised (8) 
from  the  dead,  or  (in  the  case  of  those  then  yet  living)  transformed 
by  the  divine  omnipotence  («J  61,65.  111.  7)  (9.)  The  final  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked  will,  indeed,  not  begin  until  the  awful (10)  day 
of  judgment;  but  their  punishment,  in  general,  begins  immediately 
at  their  departure  from  this  life(ll,)  and  will  never  terminate 
through  all  eternity.(12) 

Illtjstrations. 

I.  The  punishment  of  the  wicked, — Luke  16:  23,  o  nXovotog 
vnaQxcav  iv  ^aaavotg  the  rich  man  being  in  torments.  Matt.  25:  46, 
dntXevaovtav  eig  xoXaatv  aiojviov  they  shall  depart  into  everlasting 
punishment.  2  Cor.  5:  10.  2  Thess^.  1:  6,  8.  ^Rom.  2:  5,  6,  8,  9, 
To7g  net^fofiivoig  xriadtyila  Svfiog  nal  6(jyr]'  &Xi\pig  'aoi  aiivo^MQla 
Inl  naaav  ipvxv*^  av&Qwnov  tov  xategya^Ojutvov  to  xaxov  to  them 
that  obey  unrighteousness,  indignation  and  wrath  ;  tribulation  and 
anguish  upon  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil.  Heb.  10:  27, 
nvoog  ^riXog,  ta&luv  ^liUovTog  tovg  vnevavtiovgafiery  zeal  that  shall 
devour  the  adversaries.  Comp.  v.  29,  31.  6:  2.  ^  The  expressions  i 
"zeal"  "and  wrath  of  God,"  C^Ao?,  C<^(Mo?,  0^,  signify  nothing 
else  but  the  just  punishments  of  God,  which  he  inflicts  upon  the  wick- 
ed (<^  24.)  Thus  in  Rom.  2:  5,  "  wrath"  is  used  in  connexion  with 
"  righteous  judgment  of  God,"  oQyn—di^aiOKQiola  Otov  ;  and  in  j 
Heb.  10: 29,  the  expression  "  fiery  zeal"  is  explained  by  the  word  ^ 
"  punishment,"  rtfiioglag,  and  by  the  phrase  "  hands  of  the  living 
God,"  X^^Q^^  ^°*^  ^^^^  ^oivTog,  "  the  punitive  omnipotence  of  God."* 

1  See  note  y,  on  this  passage,  in  the  Comment,  on  Hebrews. 


I  ^  58.]  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.  359 

'As  death  is  the  prominent  aijid  most  evident  punishment  which  be- 
falls depraved  man  in  this  world,  this  word  is  used  to  designate  the 
whole  punishment  to  which  he  is  subjected  in  the  present  world,  as 
well  as  that  which  awaits  the  impenitent  in  the  world  to  come. — 
Thus  it  is  called  death,  and  by  other  names  equivalent  to  it.  Matt. 
10:  28,  ajTwA^m  destruction,  "to  be  destroyed  in  hell."  John.  3: 
15,  17,  that  he  (the  believer)  should  not  be  destroyed,  but  have 
eternal  life.  Phil.  3:  19,  whose  end  is  destruction.  2  Thess.  1:  9, 
oXid-Qog,  ruin,  "  everlasting  ruin."  1  Thess.  5:  3,  '*  sudden  ruin 
cometh  upon  them."  1  Tim.  6:  9.  Gal.  6:  8,  ^x^o^a,  from  the  flesh 
shall  reap  corruption.  John  8:  51,  d^avaiog,  death,  "shall  never 
see  death."  John  11:  26,  shall  never  die.  6:  50.  That  part  of  the 
future  punishment  which  the  wicked  shall  suffer  after  the  resurrec- 
tion and  transformation  of  their  bodies  and  the  awful  judgment  of 
the  world,  is  designated  by  the  pecuhar  name  of  "  the  second 
death,"  devregog  x>avaTog.  Thus  the  expression  is  used  in  Rev. 
20:  14,  (where,  accordingly,  are  also  mentioned  the  judgment  of 
the  world  (v.  12,  13)  and  the  general  resurrection,)  and  in  21:  8, 
20:  6.  2:  11.  The  origin  of  this  last  name  seems  to  be  derived 
from  this  circumstance :  at  the  time  of  the  general  resurrection  and 
final  judgment,  a  new  life  will  indeed  begin,  which  is  opposed  to 
death  in  as  far  as  that  consists  in  a  separation  of  soul  and  body. — 
(But  this  new  existence  will  not,  in  the  case  of  the  wicked,  deserve 
the  name  of  life,  for  the  re-union  of  soul  and  body  in  them  is  a  new 
death,  a  death  of  soul  and  body,  xat  ipv^ns  Jfcct  aojfiaiog  dnajXeia. 
Matt.  10:  28. 

II.  See  Eckermann's  Comp.  Theolog.  Christianae  Theoreticae, 
p.  184 ;  and  Steinbart's  System  of  the  pure  doctrine  concerning 
the  utmost  possible  happiness,  as  taught  by  Christianity,  §  81,  No* 
5.  p.  201  etc. 

«.  III.  The  punishments  termed  positive,  are  not  therefore  mere- 
h/ittrhitrary. — It  has  been  proved  that  the  existence  of  positive 
ipunishments,  in  contradistinction  to  those  which  are  the  natural  and 
necessary  consequence  of  vice,  must  be  admitted.^  But  it  does  not 
follow  that  positive  punishments  are  merely  arbitrary.  For,  not  to 
mention  the  beneficial  influence  which  the  example  of  the  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked  may  exert  on  the  more  obedient  subjects  of 
God ;  some  of  the  positive  punishments,  such  as  the  separation  of 
the  good  from  the  wicked,  are  even  necessary  in  order  that  the  bles- 
sedness of  the  righteous  may  be  perfect.  Nay,  the  misery  of  the 
wicked  would  be  still  greater,  if  they  were  totally  abandoned  to  the 

I  Flalt's  Mag.  Vol.11.  No.  6.  "Examination  of  a  new  Theory  of  rewards 
>and  punishments,"  in  refutation  of  Abicht  and  Eckermann,  who  assert^  "  that 
extemal  evils  can  neve^  be  regarded  as  the  punishment  of  guilt." 


360  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

inordinate  passions  of  each  other,  if  they  were  entirely  given  up  to 
the  natural  effects  of  these  passions,  and  were  not  in  some  degree 
restrained  by  the  melancholy  situation  in  which  they  are  placed, 
and  by  the  other  punishments  which  they  endure.^ 

IV.  Matt.  10:  28,  top  dwctfievov  ipv^v^  xat  aojfAa  anoXeaao  tv 
yiivvri  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  hell.  2  Thess. 
1:  9,  dUrjv  ziaovGiv — dno  ztjg  dohjg  Tfjg  la'^vog  avtov  (so.  xvgiov) 
they  shall  suffer  punishment — far  from  the  glory  of  his  power.  See 
also  Heb.  10:  31.  III.  I. 

V.  The  wicked  will  dwell  together,  separated  from  the  righte- 
ous. — Luke  16:  26,  X^^f^^  f.u'ya  tair^gtzTai  fiera^v  -^(.lojv  xal  vfiaiv 
there  is  a  great  gulf  fixed  between  us  and  you ;  so  that  they  that  would 
pass  from  here  to  you,  cannot ;  neither  can  they  from  thence,  pass 
to  us.  Luke  13:  28,  vfAug  ^ic^uXXoue'i^ovg  6§o)  {irjg  ^aaiXtlag  imv 
ovgapwi')  you  being  cast  out  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Matt.  8: 
12,  ol  viol  cijg  ^aadeiag  lii^Xri^rioovxat  the  sons  of  the  kingdom  shall 
be  cast  out.  Matt.  13:  40 — 43,  48,  50,  ol  uyyeXov  avX\i%ovoiv  in 
Ttjg  ^aaiXsiag  avrov  tjccvtu  ra  anccvdaXa  x«t  xoug  noiovviag  ttJp 
avofxiuv — a(poQiovat  rovg  novrjgovg  ix  {Ataov  xwv  diy.aiojv  the  angels 
will  gather  together  all  that  offend,  and  those  that  do  evil — they 
shall  separate  the  wicked  from  the  midst  of  the  just.  Malt.  25:  32 
— 34,  41,  acpogtel  dvxovg  dii  dXXi]Xct)v  {d  vlog  xov  upd-gconov)  (the 
Son  of  man)  shall  separate  them  from  one  another.  Rev.  22:  14,  15, 
i'^o)  (xfjg  n6X£(og)—7idg  6  cpiXoiv  val  nomv  xpevdog  without  the  city  is 
every  one  that  loveth  and  maketh  a  lie.  See  also  Rev.  21:  8.  20: 
15,  20. 

VI.  In  Luke  16:  28,  the  state  of  the  wicked  is  called  xonog  t^? 
paadvov  place  of  torment.  Matt.  25:  A\,noQtvta^i  aV  t^ov — dg  to 
nvQ  xo  aiMvvov  depart  from  me — into  everlasting  fire.  Mark  9:  44, 
46,  48,  >?  yt€vva  xov  nvgog,  onov — into  the  hell  of  fire,  where  (their 
worm  dieth  not  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched.)  The  mournful  na- 
ture of  the  residence  of  the  wicked,  is  described  by  various  figura- 
tive expressions  :  "  outer  darkness — I  am  tormented  in  this  flame — 
furnace  of  fire — unquenchable  fire,  where  their  worm  dieth  not — 
the  blackness  of  darkness — shall  be  tormented  in  fire  and  brimstone 
— and  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth — the  lake  of  fire  that 
burneth  with  brimstone."  Matt.  8:  12.  22:  13.  25:  30,  axoxog 
l^mitQOv.  Luke  16:  24,  odwaif^at  iv  xrj  qXoyl  xavxr],  (comp.  Matt. 
25:41.)  Matt.  13:  50,  42,  aafiifog  xov  nvgog,  Mark  9:  43-^48,  nvp 
*' apioxov,  onov  6   0Xft>A?;|   dvxwv  ov   xeXivia.     Jude  13.  ^oqog  xov 

axoiovg.  Comp.  Rev.  J4:  10,  11,  fianavia&7]G{xai,  h  nvgl  xul  deio) — 
yal  d  aanvSg  xou  ^aaaviGf^ov  avxujv  dvapalvfi.  \^\^{),  Xi^ivri  nvgog 
xaiOfii'pTj  ip  ^iiM.    20:14.  21:8.     The  figure   by   which   hell   is 

1  See  Jacobi's  Reflections  on  the  wise  purposes  of  God,  Pt.  I.  p  192 ;  and  the 
Easy  and  satisfactory  proof  of  the  existence  of  God  and  truth  of  Religion,  p.  225. 


^  58.]  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.  861 

represented  as  burning  with  fire  and  brimstone,  seems  to  be  taken 
from  the  fate  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrafi  ;^  as  well  as  that  of  their 
"smoke  ascending."  Let  the  reader  compare  Rev.  14:  10, 11  with 
Gen.  19:  24,  28.  To  this  coincidence  of  the  description  of  future 
punishments,  in  the  Revelation,  with  the  punishment  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah,  Peter  perhaps  alludes,  when  he  says,  (2  Pet.  2:  6,) 
"God  punished  the  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  with  destruction 
by  fire,  and  thus  gave  a  monitory  example  to  all  the  wicked." 

Still,  that  even  this  abode  of  v/retchedness,  this  very  miserable 
part  of  the  universe,  in  which  the  wicked  shall  dwell,  is  not  totally 
excluded  from  the  influence  of  the  boundless  goodness  of  God  (Ps. 
145:  9,  10,)  is  evident  from  the  circumstance,  that  in  this  mournful 
abode,  the  situation  of  some  is  more  tolerable  than  that  of  others  ; 
for  we  are  told  (Matt.  1 1 :  22,  24)  that  the  lot  of  Tyre  and  Sidon 
will  be  more  tolerable  in  the  day  of  judgment  than  that  of  Chorazin 
and  Bethsaida  ;  and  (Luke  12:  48)  that  he  who  knew  not  his  mas- 
ter's will,  shall  be  beaten  with  few  stripes.  For,  as  the  future  state 
of  each  individual,  will  be  in  exact  accordance  with  his  conduct  in 
this  life,  it  is  evident,  that  just  as  there  are  various  gradations^  of 
guilt,  there  must  be  a  great  variety  in  the  degrees  of  future  punish- 
ment.^ "  That  each  one  may  receive  according  to  the  things  done 
in  the  body — he  shall  give  unto  each  one  according  to  his  work — 
who  will  render  unto  every  one  according  to  his  deeds — whatsoever 
a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also  reap — he  that  doeth  wrong,  shall 
receive  the  reward  of  his  wrong."  2  Cor.  5:  10,  iva  xofAiarjTccc 
ixaaiog  toc  did  zov  oiofiuTog.  Matt.  25:  42.  16:  27,  xdckx  ztjv  ngeL^iv 
aviov  dnodojafi,  ixdaiio.  Rom.  2:  6,  xaia  id  tgya  aviov.  Gal.  6:  7, 
6  ydg  idv  nTieiQrj  dv&gconog,  Tovro  xal  d^igiaet.  Col.  3:  25,  o  ddtxcHv 
xofAieJiai  6  rjdiKTjae. 

VII.  John  5:  29,  oi  rd  (pavXa  ngd^avieg  {lyinogivaovtat)  ilg 
di^dazaoiv  xglaeojg  they  that  have  done  evil'shall  come  forth  to  the 
resurrection  of  damnation. 

VIII.  John  5:  28.  Acts  24:  15.  Rev.  20:  12^  13.   ^ 

IX.  Acts  26:  8,  r/  ccntaiov   ytghiiai  nag   vfilv,  ei  6  'deog  lovg 


1  See  Dissert,  de  Epist.  cathol.  note  63. 

2  Matt.  5:  22,  i'voyoi  rfj  x^iasc—T(u  avvs^Qiut — eig  tt]v  yhwav  zov  tivqos.  In 
the  Dissert,  in  Libros  h'lsloricos  N.  T.  p.  2:i/the  first  two  of  these  expressions 
are  e.vplained  as  meaning  two  different  degrees  of  future  punishment,  according 
to  the  different  degrees  of  guilt.  But  the  2d  and  3d  are  explained  as  the  same 
degree;  because  no  difference  can  be  assigned  as  existing  between  the  words 
gaxd  and  juojQ^;  and  consequently,  none  between  the  degree  of  guilt,  the  pun- 
ishment of  which  is  expressed  in  the  2d  and  3d  phrases.  Evoyog  aWi^Qioi  qui 
similis  est  hoviinihus  synedrio  ohnoxiis.  The  last  expression,  I'voxog  6ie  zi)v  yttwav 
Tov  Trrpo's  deserving  future  punishment,  describes  the  grade  of  punishment 
which  is  referred  to  in  the  first  and  second  clauses, 

3  Luke  12:  47,  48,  SaQyasrtu  noUMe—ohyag.  Matt.  11:  20—24.  Rora.  2:9.— 
See  Reinhard's  Dogmatik,  p.  695. 

46 


362  OF  MAN.  [bK.  Iff, 

vsxQovg  iytiQfi  why  should  it  be  thought  a  thing  incredible,  that 
God  should  raise  the  dead.  John  5:  21. 

X.  Mark  8:  38,  o  vlog  tov  uvd^Qtanov  inaieyiyv^^atTM  aviov 
the  Son  of  man  shall  be  ashamed  of  him.  Luke  12:  9,  omagvi&ti^ 
ceiai  tvMTiLov  TMP  dyyik(op  tov  {^(ov  shall  be  denied  before  the 
angels  of  God. 

XI.  The  punishment  of  the  wicked,  begins  immediately  after 
their  death. — Luke  16:  22 — 25,  and  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  poor 
man  died,  and  was  carried  by  angels  into  Abraham's  bosom.  The 
rich  man  also  died,  and  was  buried.  And  in.  Hades  (the  place  of 
departed  spirits)  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments,  and  saw 
Abraham  afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom ;  and  he  cried,  and 
said,  Father  Abraham,  have  mercy  on  me,  and  send  Lazarus,  that 
he  may  dip  the  tip  of  his  finger  in  water,  and  cool  my  tongue ;  for 
I  am  tormented  in  this  flame.  Comp.  v.  28.  From  verses  22  and 
28,  we  must  conclude  that  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  (like  the 
happiness  of  the  blessed)  will  commence  immediately  after  death. 
This  inference  is  the  more  legitimate,  as  the  evident  scope  of  the 
whole  parable  is  to  describe  the  lot  of  the  righteous  and  the  wicked 
after  death.^ 

XII.  The  punishments  of  the  wicked  are  eternal. — They  are 
described  as  "  everlasting  punishment,"  in  opposition  to  "  everlast- 
ing life" — and  "  unquenchable  fire,"  Matt.  25:  46,  xoXaaig  aiojviog. 
— Mark  9:  44 — 48.  Matt.  3:  12:  niJg  aa^eotov.  In  reference  to 
the  first  of  these  passages  it  must  be  remarked,^  that  even  if  the 
word  aiojvtog  eternal,  in  itself  considered,  could  be  taken  in  a  limit- 
ed sense,  it  could  not  in  this  application,  have  been  understood  m 
any  other  sense  than  as  meaning  an  absolute  eternity,  for  Josephos 
expressly  informs  us  that  the  eternity  of  hell  torments  was  a  doc- 
trine of  the  Essenes  and  Pharisees  [aidiog  zifnaQia^  ti^wQiai,  ddid- 
XfinvotY  in  the  days  oi  our  Lord. 

The  fact  that  we  are  not  intimately  acquainted  with  the  nature 
and  degrees  of  future  punishment,  certainly  does  not  authorize  us  in 
denying  their  eternal  duration.^ 

[To  the  above  texts  might  be  added  many  others,  in  which  the 
eternity  of  future  punishment  is  either  expressly  taught  or  evidently 
implied. 

1.  Those  in  which  it  is  called  by  other  terms,  with  the  epithet 
eternal  aicavtog  or  uidiog  added. — Matt.  18:  8,  wherefore,  if  thy 

1  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata  post  mortem  p.  21. 

2  Dissert.  I.  in  Lib.  hist.  N.  T.  p.  41. 

3  Reinhard's  Dogmatik,  §  196.  No.  4. 

4  Morus'  Epit.  Theol.  christ.  Pt.  VII.  §  11 ;  and  Dr.  Mark,  On  the  unreason- 
ableness of  some  of  the  doctrines  of  the  church,  p.  122. 


1 

^  58.]  .  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT.  363 

hand  or  thy  foot  ensnare  thee,  cut  it  off  and  cast  it  from  thee  ;  it  is 
better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  lame  or  a  cripple,  than  having  two 
hands  or  two  feet,  to  be  cast  into  everlasting  fire.  See  also  v.  9. 
25:  4,  then  shall  he  say  also  to  them  on  the  left  hand,  depart  from 
me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his 
angels.  Dan.  12:  2,  and  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of 
the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  (fi^ny— a/wi'foc)  life,  and 
some  to  everlasting  contempt.  2  Thess.  1:  9,  who  shall  be  punished 
with  everlasting  destruction,  far  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and 
the  glory  of  his  power.  Jude  6,  and  the  angels  which  kept  not  their 
first  estate,  but  left  their  own  habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in  ever- 
lasting (oci'dtocg)  chains,  in  darkness,  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great 
day.  v.  7,  even  as  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and  the  cities  about  them, 
— are  set  forth  for  an  example,  suffering  the  vengeance  of  eternal 
fire.  V.  13,  (they  are)  wandering  stars,  to  whom  is  reserved  the 
blackness  of  darkness  for  ever  («/?  top  alwva.) 

2.  The  texts  in  which  the  torments  of  the  wicked  are  said  to  en- 
dure for  ever  and  ever,  elg  tovg  alojvag  nZv  aiifiVMv. — Rev.  14:  1 1, 
and  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  for  ever  and  ever  (through 
the  eternity  of  eternities).  20:  10,  and  they  shall  be  tormented  day 
and  night  for  ever  and  ever  (through  the  eternity  of  eternities). 

That  this  mode  of  expression  is  applied  to  designate  an  absolute 
eternity,  the  reader  may  easily  be  convinced  by  referring  to  the 
texts  in  which  the  same  Greek  phrase  is  used  ;  such  as  Gal.  1:  5. 
2  Tim.  4:  18.  Phil.  4:  20.  Heb.  13:21.  1  Pet.  4:11.  5:  11.  Rev. 
1:6.  5:  13.  7:  12.   1:  18. 

3.  Those  passages  in  which  the  eternity  of  heaven  and  hell  is 
contrasted. 

The  eternity  of  heaven  is  admitted,  and  these  texts,  among 
others,  are  referred  to  for  proof.  If,  then,  they  prove  eternity 
when  applied  to  heaven,  they  must  necessarily  do  the  same  if  ap- 
plied to  hell,  in  the  same  manner,  and  often  even  in  the  same  verse. 
Matt.  25:  46,  and  these  (the  wicked)  shall  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  everlasting  life.  Dan.  12:  2, 
and  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth,  shall  awake,, 
some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  everlasting  contempt. 

4.  Those  texts  which  affirm  their  eternity  negatively  by  denying 
that  they  will  have  any  end.  Mark  9:  43,  and  if  thy  hand  ensnare 
thee,  cut  it  off;  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  maimed  into  life,  than 
having  two  hands  to  be  cast  into  hell,  into  the  fire  that  shall  never 
be  quenched,  v.  44,  where  the  worm  dieth  not  and  the  fire  is  not 
quenched,  v.  45,  and  if  thy  foot  ensnare  thee,  cut  it  off:  it  is  bet- 
ter for  thee  to  enter  lame  into  life,  than  having  two  feet  to  be  cast 
into  hell,  into  the  fire  that  shall  never  be  quenched,  v.  46,  where 


364  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

their  worm  dieth  not,  and  their  fire  is  not  quenched,  v.  48,  and  if 
thine  eye  ensnare  thee,  pluck  it  out ;  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God,  with  one  eye,  than  having  two  eyes  to  be 
cast  into  hell-fire  ;  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  their  fire  is  not 
quenched.     S.] 


BOOK    III 


OF    CREATED    RATIONAL    BEINGS. 


PART  II.— OF  MAN. 


SECTION  II. 


OF  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  GOD  T6r  THE  SALVATION  OF  FALLEN  MAN. 

<5>  59.     Plan  for  the  Salvation  of  man  through  Christ, 

As  all  men  were  involved  in  misery,  without  their  fault,  by  the 
sin  of  one  man  (<5>  55 — 57);  God  was  induced(l)  mercifully(2)  to 
open(3)  a  way  of  salvation  for  all  men,  without  their  merit,  by  the 
man  Jesus  Christ(4).     Rom»  5:  12 — 19. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Since  by  man  came  death,  by  man  also  came  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead. — For  if  through  the  offence  of  one,  many  have  died; 
much  more  have  the  grace  and  gift  of  God,  through  the  grace  of 
the  one  man,  Jesus  Christ,  abounded  unto  the  many.  1  Cor.  15: 
21,  initdrj  dl  avd^gconov  6  ^avaTog^  xctt  dl  dv&gconov  ai/daiaaig 
vcnQoiv.  Rom.  5:  15,17,  tl  iw  rov  ivog  nagamwfjiaTt,  ol  nokXoi 
dniitavov,  tioXXm  ^dXXov  ^*  XciQvg  rov  S^eov^  xal  fj  Scoged  tv  xdgt^Tt  r^ 
tov  ivog  av&Qconov  Irjaov  Xgiatov  tig  tovg  noXXovg  insgiaaeyai. 

II.  Tit.  3:  4,  5,  ?J  '^griGTOtrig  xccl  rj  (fnXav&goonlcc  ineqiavt]  tov 
ccairjgog  tJ^cov  d^tov — xaid  tov  aviov  tXiOv  tacoasv  i^ftdg  the  kindness 
and  philanthropy  of  God  our  Saviour  appeared — according  to  his 
mercy  he  saved  us.     Ephes.  2:  4.  1  Pet.  1:3. 


866  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

III.  On  the  subject  of  the  suitableness  of  the  plan  of  salvation 
to  fallen  man,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  author's  work  on  the 
Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  633—640,  659,  612. 

IV.  Christ  is  therefore  the  Restorer  and,  as  it  were,  the  second 
Father  of  the  human  family.  Rom.  5:  14,  *^ddf4.  iaic  rvnog  rov 
fiiUovTog,  Adam  is  a  type  of  him  who  was  to  come.  1  Cor.  15: 
45,  47,  49,  0  i'axccTog  '^ddfi—o  devtfgogciv^Qwnog  the  last  Adam 
— the  second  man. 


SECTION    LX. 


Magnitude  and  nature  of  that  happiness  which  we  obtain  through 
Christ — the  state  of  the  blessed  immediately  after  death. 

Great  and  exalted  indeed  is  the  blessedness(l)  which  the  bound- 
less goodness  of  God(2)  has  appointed  for  unfortunate  man.  Even 
death  itself,  which  has  been  entailed  on  all  men  through  the  medi- 
um of  our  natural  depravity (3),  is,  according  to  the  purpose  of 
God,  no  longer  a  punishment(4),  but  becomes  a  blessing  to  us. (5) 
Death  therefore  is  stripped  of  its  melancholy  aspect(6),  and  is,  in 
truth,  to  the  immortal(7)  spirit,  the  beginning  of  real  life. (8)  For 
immediately  after  the  death  of  the  body (9),  the  disencumbered 
spirit  may  be  liberated(lO)  from  all  evil(ll),  and  may  be  transfer- 
red into  the  actual  enjoyment  of  those  pleasures,  of  which,  in  the 
present  life,  he  was  permitted  to  have  only  a  remote  prospective 
view.  (12) 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  future  blessedness  of  the  christian,  is  termed  "  The 
glory  (in  the  presence)  of  God — to  reign  in  life — the  glorious  liber- 
ty of  the  children  of  God — the  riches  of  the  glorious  inheritance  of 
his  saints — an  eternal  weight  of  glory— so  great  a  salvation — the 
greatest  and  most  precious  promises."  Rom.  5:  2,  do^a  -^eov  v^ 
J7,  iv  ^(orj  ^aatXevtiv.  8:  18,  21,  iXsvd^egla  TTJg  So^ijg  kop  ti'xvcov  rov 
'&eov.  Eph.  1:  18,  nlovrog  tijg doirjg  trig  xly^QOvofAiug  Iv  dylocg.  Col. 
1: 27.  2  Cor.  4:  17,  aiMPiov  ^dgog  do^tjg.  2  Thess.  1: 10.  Heb.  2: 3, 
TfiXixavTfj  GOiTfjQia,  v.  5—10.  2  Pet.  1:  4,  fif'ytava  xai  tifjiia  inayytX- 
fictza. 


&  60.  STATE  OF  THE  BLESSED  AFTER  DEATH.  367 

11.     Eph.  2:  4,  5,  7,   noUtj   dyanrj   amov  {&60v) — vnfg(iakXaiv 
nXovTog  ;faptTO^  uvzovy  the  great  love  of  God — the  exceeding  rich- 
es of  his  grace.   1:  6,  do^a  t^g  x^gtiog  avvov  his  glorious  grace,  v. 
14.  2Thess.  2:  16. 
'     111.     1  Cor.  15:  21.  Rom.  5:  12.  8:  10.     ^    ^ 

IV.  Rom.  8:  1,2,  ovdii/vvv  KaicatgtfAa  To7g  iv  X.  L  there  is 
now  no  condemnation  to  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus.  5;  16 — 
18.     See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ. 

V.  Rom.  8:  28,  To7g  ayancjai^TOv  Otov  navta  ovpegyai  alg  dya— 
&QV,  to  them  that  love  God  all  things  work  together  for  good.  v. 
35,  38.  Phil.  1:  21,  if^olro  dnodavdv  yitgdog  for  me  to  die  is  gain. 
V.  23.  2  Cor.  5:  8,  evdoKOv^uv  fidXXovixdtjfiijaoct  ix  tov  acofiarogwe 
wish  rather  to  depart  from  the  body. 

VI.  John  8:  51.  11:  26,  6  maxsvwv  eig  ifii  fn^  dnox^diprj  dgtov 
aimvu,  he  that  believeth  in  me  shall  never  die.  6:  50. 

VII.  Luke  20:  38,  '&e6g  ovx  iaxL  rcov  vfxgmv  dkXd'CojvKov  God 
is  not  a  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  hving. 

VIII.  In  the  Dissertation  "  Concerning  the  state  of  the  blessed 
after  death,"  §2,  it  is  remarked  that  the  verse,  Rom.  8:  10, 
to  GMfia  viUQov,  to  di-jTvevjLia  C(orj,  the  body  is  dead,  but  the  spirit 
is  alive,  refers  to  the  state  of  the  soul  of  the  true  Christian  between 
death  and  the  resurrection. 

IX.  State  of  the  blessed  betiveen  death  and  judgment. — That 
their  blessedness  begins  immediately  after  death,  is  proved  in  the 
Dissertation  just  alluded  to,  <5>  1-  HI.  from  the  following  considera- 
tions : — 1.  According  to  Phil.  1:21,  Paul  considered  death  as 
gain  ;  and  in  the  23d  verse  he  expressly  places  this  gain  in  a  closer 
union  with  Christ  ovv  XgioriZ  ehui ;  and  in  2  Cor.  5:  8,  the 
phrases  "  to  depart  from  the  body"  and  *'  to  be  at  home  with  the 
Lord,"  ixdi]fi7Jaat  ex  tov  Gtofiaiog — tvdriiirinat  ngog  top  xvgiop,  are 
combined  together. — 2.  The  muhitude  represented  in  Rev.  7:  9, 
etc.  as  praising  God,  were  spirits  of  the  dead  anterior  to  the  resur- 
rection.— 3.  Agreeably  to  Luke  16:  22,  25,  28,  the  blessedness  of 
the  righteous  will  begin  immediately  after  death.  Comp.  <5>  58,  111. 
10.  The  blessedness  of  the  righteous  before  the  resurrection  and 
after  that  event  does  not  indeed  differ  in  kind,  and  they  are  both 
described  alike  in  the  New  Testament  (see  Rev.  7:  9 — 13,  17,  and 
21:  4.  22:  3 — 5  ;)  but  their  happiness  is  increased  by  their  reunion 
with  a  more  perfect  body  and  by  their  honourable  acquittal  at  the 
final  judgment.  But  that  the  human  soul  should  be  incapable  of  ac- 
tivity without  the  body,  can  never  be  proved. 

X.  The  sufferings  of  the  righteous  terminate  with  the  present 
life. — In  Rom.  8:  18,  it  is  said,  that  these  sufferings  refer  only  to 
the  present  time,  ra  na&tifiaia  tov  vvv  i^aigov  ;  and  in  1  Pet.  5: 9, 


368  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

that  they  befal  those  brethren  only  who  are  in  this  world,  iv  zc^ 
noofim  ddsk(fi6trjti  and  not  the  others,  the  citizens  of  heaven.  Heb. 
12;  23.  Thus  also  in  other  passages  these  afflictions  are  described 
as  very  short ;  they  are  called,  "  our  present  light  afflictions" — 
"  temporary" — "  for  a  season  ye  grieve" — "  ye  suffer  awhile."  2 
Cor.  4:  17,  to  TKHQaviUa  iXaqjQOv  tijg  ^Uipecog  t^^mv.  v.  18,  Tigoo- 
naiga.  1  Pet.  1:  6,  6\iyov  XvntiOtvug.  5:  10,  oh'yov  nadovtig.  Heb. 
12:  10,  TipoV  oUyug  rifitgag  naidavai  rtixug.  In  this  place,  o  de  {^VQiog) 
mugt  be  supplied  from  the  context. 

XL  Same  subject  continued. — Lazarus  in  his  life  time  received 
evil ;  but  now  he  is  comforted — the  Lord  will  deliver  me  from 
every  evil  work — God  shall  wipe  away  all  tears  from  their  eyes — 
no  heat  shall  fall  upon  them.  Luke  16:  25,  Ad^agog  Iv  zrj  Cw>J  ra 
9iuxd  dni'Xaljf,  vvv  naQa^aXeiTai.  2  Tim.  4:  18,  Qvaexal  fia  6  xvgiog 
dno  naviog  tgyoy  novrigov.  Heb.  13:  3.  Rev.  7:  17,  i'iaXei^iiL  6  &e6g 
ndv  ddxgvov  dno  zmu  oq^d^aXfxmv  uvtMv.  v.  16,  ovde  ndv  xavfxa  iiiar] 
in  avTOvg.  *'  Heat"  xav/ua  is  used  to  express  sufferings  in  general.*^ 
All  evidence  for  the  necessity  of  pain,  in  order  by  contrast  to  height- 
en the  value  of  subsequent  pleasure,  is  derived  from  the  experience 
in  temporal  and  transient  objects,  which  are  essentially  different 
from  the  unchangeable  blessings  of  heaven  ;  or,  at  least,  from  ex- 
perience made  in  circumstances  totally  different  from  those  of  our 
future  state.^  To  the  position,  that  the  blessed  will  be  liberated 
from  all  pain  immediately  after  death,  it  cannot  be  urged  as  an  ob- 
jection, that  the  happiness  of  the  blessed  will  be  much  augmented 
at  the  time  of  the  resurrection  (<§>  61,  65;)  and  that,  as  well  pre- 
viously to  the  resurrection,  as  after  it,  there  will  be  various  grades 
of  happiness.  For  although  the  possibility  of  increase  in  happiness, 
presupposes  that  it  was  not  perfect  before,  yet  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  imperfection  was  combined  with  unpleasant  feelings.  For 
the  present  enjoyment  of  happiness  may  have  the  effect  to  render 
the  expectation  of  its  future  augmentation,  not  an  impatient,  but  a 
pleasing  and  confident  expectation  which  shall  enhance  the  value 
of  our  present  enjoyment.  Similar  to  this  will  be  the  progressive 
improvement  in  moral  excellence  in  the  world  to  come  (*§>  62.)  In 
this  case  also  the  pleasure  arising  from  the  consciousness  of  our 
moral  attainments  will  be  enhanced  by  the  expectation  of  future 
growth  in  virtue,  and  will  at  least  never  be  disturbed  by  reproaches 
of  conscience  for  neglect  of  duty.  No  blessed  spirit  will  be  dis- 
satisfied at  not  having  yet  attained  the  highest  degree  of  moral  per- 
fection, but  will  much  rather  rejoice  at  his  regular  and  constant 
ascent  from  one  grade  of  moral  perfection  to  another.     Finally,  the 


1  Dissert.de  Vita  Beata,  Note  37.  Eccl.  14:  27.  James  1:  11. 
9  On  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  587. 


^61.]  RESURRECTION CHANGES  OP  THE  WORLD.  369 

disapprobation  of  the  sins  of  our  present  life,  will  be  divested  of 
pain,  by  our  increased  knowledge  and  enjoyment  of  the  Redeemer 
and  his  merits ;  so  that  our  CQnfidence  in  divine  grace  will  render 
that  penitent  recollection  rather  pleasing  than  painful.^ 

XII.  In  2  Cor.  5:  6 — 8,  the  "  being  absent  from  the  Lord" 
during  our  residence  in  the  body,  is  derived  (yag)  from  "  walking 
by  faith  and  not  by  sight."  The  "  being  at  home  with  the  Lord," 
on  account  of  which  the  "  departure  from  the  body"  is  desirable,  is 
therefore  by  virtue  of  the  antithesis,  "  a  walking  by  sight  and  not 
by  faith,"  (nfgcnazelv  dia  eidovg  ov  did  TTiaTeojg.) 


SECTION   LXI. 


The  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  changes  of  our  world. 

But  those  effects,  also,  which  death  has  on  the  body,  shall  be 
removed.(l)  For  the  same (2)  body  which  was  exposed  to  corrup- 
tion, and  which  experienced  a  dissolution  of  its  particles, (3)  while 
the  soul  was  in  a  state  of  happy  existence,  shall  be  raised  by  the 
power  of  God, (4)  and  be  brought  to  a  state  of  renovated  life. (5) 
Being  changed  to  other,(6)  to  immortal(7)  bodies,  which  are  per- 
fectly adapted  to  that  higher  life(8)  which  is  to  come,  and  is  totally 
different  from  the  present  animal  life,  the  bodies(9)  of  all(lO)  the 
saints  shall,  at  a  particular  appointed(U)  time,   "  at  the  last  day," 

(12)  be  raised  from  the  dead  and  be  reunited  to  their  happy  spirits. 

(13)  At  the  same  time  the  bodies  of  the  wicked  also  shall  be 
raised,(I4)  and  the  bodies  of  the  persons  then  living  shall  suddenly 
be  transformed  into  a  state  similar  to  that  of  those  arisen  from  the 
dead. (15)  Simultaneously  with  this  universal  transmutation  of  all 
human  bodies,  a  similar  transmutation  of  the  earth  will  occur,(16) 
which  will  also  extend  to  other  worlds.(17)  The  visible  world 
shall  be  consumed  with  fire  ;(18)  that  it  may  no  longer  be  subject 
to  decay,(19)  and  that  in  its  renovated  form,(20)  it  may  constitute 

1  See  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata,  p.  30.  Opu8C.  Acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  108.  Vol.  III.  p. 
41. 

47 


370  OF  MAN.  [bK.   III. 

a  part  of  heaven  or  (2J )  the  glorious  kingdom  of  God. (22,  23) 
Those  citizens,  therefore,  of  the  celestial  kingdom, (24)  who  belong- 
ed to  the  human  family,  shall  receive,  not  only  their  bodies  in  a 
renovated  state,  worthy  of  the  heavenly  kingdom, (25)  but  also  their 
former  residence(26)  in  such  a  condition(27)  as  shall  be  perfectly 
adapted  to  the  dignity  and  the  happiness  which  they  shall  then 
possess.     Rom.  8:  19 — 21. 

Illustrations. 

I.  1  Cor.  15:  20 — 26,  iaj^aiog  lyj^gog  ituxupyeTiai  6  x^uvuioi 
the  last  enemy  that  shall  be  destroyed,  is  death,  v.  54,  57, 
xarfnoO^t}  odavuiog  fig  vlxog  death  is  swallowed  up  in  victory. 

II.  Who  shall  change    our   vile  body   (literally,  our  body  of 
vileness) — that  which  thou  sowest,  is  not  quickened,  unless  it  die — 
God  giveth  to  every  seed  its  own  body.     Phil.  3:  21,   (xtraaxw^" 
thfc  TO  (TMficc  irjg  tctniipfoGfcjg  i^niov.     1  Cor.  15:36,  gv  6  nneigiig, 
ov   ^oounoifTiat',  idv  f.tij  anoOavrj.  v.  38,  o   Ofog  dldoDOt   txaaiM  zoUif 
GniQfiaibiv  TO  t'diov  a(Of.ia.  Just  as  herbs  come  forth  from  the  seed,  | 
and  in  their  nature  correspond   to  the  seed  that  was  sown  ;  thus,  1 
from  the  dead  body  shall  the  future  body  arise,  to  ow/m  y£vr,a6fievov,    \ 
V.  37.     But,  just  as  the  seed,  which  contains  the  germ  of  the  future   j 
herb,  must  experience  a  great  change,  duox^aveJv,  and  receive  to  J 
itself  many  foreign  particles,  (v.  37,  38 ;)  so  also  will  the  future  I 
body  not  consist  exclusively  of  the  constituent  particles  of  the  dead  ] 
body.^     In  1  Cor.  15:  53,  we  read,  detTO^JvTiiovTovio  ivdvaaa{ton   \ 
dd^avaotav  this  mortal  must  be  clothed  in   immortality  :  and  Rom.  j 
8:  II,  ^oonottjoit^  rd  ^vtjzd   ocofiaTcc  vficav  he  shall  quicken  your  * 
mortal  bodies. 

III.  It  is  sown  in  corruption — in  dishonour — in  weakness— aU  j 
who  are  in  the  graves.     1  Cor.  15:  4^,  an(l(}6Tai  h  (f&ogd—iv 
dvaiiq: — itf  da&fi^fia.  John  5:  28,  ndvTeg  ol  if  TOig  fAVf]f.ifioig. 

iV.  By  the  power  by  which  he  is  able  to  subject  all  things 
unto  himself— the  power  of  God — God  shall  raise  us  up  by  his 
power — Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead,  by  the  glory  of  the  Fath- 
er— the  working  of  his  mighty  power  which  he  exerted  in  Christ, 
when  he  raised  him  from  the  dead.  Phil.  3:  21,  'AaTdzijv  iv^Qyuuv 
Tov  dvvao^at  avrov  xal  vnoidlat,  aavTO)  tu  udvia.  Malt.  22:  29^ 
dvvttfxig  TOV  'dioy.  ^Acts  26:  8.  ICor.  6:  14,  o  Oio  ISeyj^QH  ri^ug  dia 
Trig  dvvdfiewg  auzov.  Rom.  8:  II,  comp.  with  6:  4,  riyigxti]  X^jtcnog^ 
i'A  vex^cov  did  Tr,g  doirig  tov  jiargog.  Eph.  I:  19,  W,  ii'igyeia  tov 
KQazovg  Trjg  ia/vog  'ccviov  iji^  Ivi'joyi^aav  Iv  tm  Xgioito  lyiiQug  aviov 
£x  i'6x(jwi'.     "  We  must  know  God,  the  Almighty,  if  we  are  to  be- 

1  Michaelis*  Dog.  p.  729—731. 


4>  61.]  RESURRECTION TRANSFORMATION.  3i7l 

lieve  in  the  resurrection. — He  is  the  Author  of  the  new  life  of  our 
bodies.''  Rom.  4:  17,  21.   1  Cor.  15:  38.^ 

V.  "  All  the  living  and  the  dead  shall  be  transformed^' — 
Phil.  3:  21,  fieTaa/t^^iuTtafi.  1  Cor.  15:  51,  nuvifg  ccXXay}]a6fii&u. 
Now,  as  those  who  shall  be  living  at  the  time  of  the  resurrection, 
will  not  cast  off  their  bodies  entirely  (2  Cor.  5:  2 — 4,)  as  their 
bodies  will  only  exchange  their  old  properties  for  new  ones,  inevdv- 
aaa&ac  Xva  xuTOTjoi^rj  to  Ovriov  vno  ir^g  ^fui;?,  and  they  thus  retain 
the  same  body,  with  new  properties  (I  Cor.  15:  53;)  it  follows, 
that  the  dead  will  also  receive  their  old  bodies,  only  in  a  renovated 
form.  In  both  cases  there  is  a  renovation.  In  both  cases,  in  the 
dead  and  the  living,  the  corruptible  must  put  on  incorruption, 
Sh  to  (fOaoTOv  TOUTO  ivdvaaoOav  ii^v  dcfOagclav. 

In  the  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata,^  the  passage  2  Cor.  5:  2,  4,  is 
explained  thus:  ''As  it  is  the  natural  desire  of  our  spirits,  to  in- 
habit a  body ;  our  groanings  under  the  sufferings  to  which  we  are 
exposed  in  our  present  frail  body,  extort  from  us  the  wish,  not  only 
to  be  delivered  from  the  present  sufferings  of  the  body,  but  to  re- 
ceive a  body  of  a  different  structure,  to  receive  a  heavenly  body 
(v.  1)  instead  of  the  earthly  one  ;  and  especially,  to  receive  it  in 
such  a  manner,  it^dvauoOui,  v.  3,  that  we  might  never  be  without 
a  body ;  that  we  might  receive  it  without  laying  off  our  earthly 
body  (i-nei^duaaaOai,  v.  2,  4,)  without  dying,  (that  mortality  might 
be  swallowed  up  in  life.)  .In  such  a  change  we  should  never  be  di- 
vested of  body  ;  and  thus  the  desire  of  our  nature  would  be  fully 
gratified."  Kant,  in  his  "  Religionslehre"  (S.  183,)  in  opposition 
to  tlie  resurrection  of  the  body  in  the  future  life,  has  remarl^ed, 
"  reason  can  see  no  advantage  in  the  supposition,  that  a  body, 
which,  however  much  it  may  have  been  purified,  is  still  to  be  form- 
ed substantially  of  the  same  materials ;  a  body,  to  which  we  have 
never  been  rightly  attached  in  this  life,  should  be  dragged  after  us 
through  all  eternity.  Nor  can  reason  comprehend  what  would  be 
the  use  of  this  body,  which  consists  of  earth,  in  heaven,  i.  e.  in 
another  part  of  the  universe,  in  which  probably  other  substances 
than  matter  are  necessary  to  the  existence  and  preservation  of 
living  beings."  In  reply  to  these  remarks,  it  may  be  observed  that 
no  reason  can  be  assigned  why  we  should  have  a  decided  aversion 
to  a  future  union  with  our  bodies  ;  for  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the 
body  affords  the  spirit  very  great  advantages ;  and  we  have  no  rea- 
son to  expect  that  the  sufferings  which  result  from  the  structure  of 
our  present  body,  will  be  concomitant  on  the  future  renovated  body. 
Nor  can  it  be  maintained,  as  Kant  has  asserted,  that  the  most  minute 

1  On  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ. 

5  Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  84  etc.  ; 


373  OF  MAN.  [bK. 


i 


in. 


particles  of  our  bodies,  the  ultimate  elementary  principles  of  which 
it  consists,  which  no  chemical  science  has  ever  been  able  to  reach, 
are  of  such  a  nature  as  to  disqualify  it  for  existence  in  our  future 
residence,  the  nature  of  which  is  totally  unknown  to  us.^ 
VJ.     1  Cor.  15:37,39—50. 

VII.  It  is  raised  in  incorruption — in  glory — in  power — for  they 
cannot  die  any  more — that  our  body  may  be  formed  like  unto 
Christ's  glorious  body — Christ  dieth  no  more.  1  Cor.  15:  42, 
lyeigeioit  Iv  ccq-d^agala — [iv  dolt} — iv  dvvufiet.)  v.  50,  52.  Luke  20:  36, 
ov  yap  anoOavflp  I'vi  dvvaviai.  Phil.  3:  21,  aoifxa  ovfA^ogqov  to> 
GWfiaii  Tfjg  do'irjg  amov  {Xqioiov.)  comp.  Rom.  6:  9,  Xgioiog  ovxiTi 
anoOi/ijaxfc. 

VIII.  the  body  is  sown  a  natural  (sensual,  animal)  body — it  is 
raised  a  spiritual — we  shall  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly — God 
will  destroy  it  (the  stomach) — they  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in 
marriage,  for  they  are  like  unto  the  angels,  they  are  the  sons  of  the 
resurrection.  1  Cor.  15:  44 — 49.  omigeTai  GMfia  xiwyrAov,  lyiigtiu^ 
GcofAU  npiVftuTixoif — qoQtaofAev  iiiji/  eixova  tou  fnovguviou.  Phil.  3: 
21  (111.  7.)  1  Cor.  6:  13,  o  ■{}(6g  tyiv  xodlav  xarccgyr/afi.  Luke  20: 
35,  0VT6  yufnouaiv,  ovie  txyuf-iiaxovtat,  laayyekoi  yotg  fiaiv  oi  vloi 
ztjg  avuGTUoeMg. 

IX.  All  those  in  the  graves — (shall  hear  his  voice) — that  they 
should  not  be  made  perfect  without  us.  John  5:  28,  ndvTfg  ol  iv 
to7g  ^vtinfloig.     Heb.  11:  38,  40  iva  futj  y^Q^?  rifAWv  tftUiw&foGi. 

X.  The  exceptions  which  are  specified*  in  Malt.  27:  52,  53,  and 
Rev.  20:  4,  imply  that  in  all  other  cases  the  general  remark  holds 
good.  In  reference  to  the  second  passage,  it  is  remarked,  in  the 
Nevv  Apology  for  the  revelation  (<§>  27),  that  the  first  resurrection, 
oLi/aGiaGig  Tigcjzr],  v.  5,  6,  cannot  be  a  symbolic  resurrection  be- 
cause it  is  placed  in  opposition  to  the  resurrection  of  all  the  other 
dead,  which  will  occur  a  thousand  years  afterward. 

XL  The  hour  cometh — at  the  last  trumpet — the  time  of  the 
clead — the  seventh  angel  sounded — (God)  hath  appointed  a  day. — 
John  5:  28,  tgyeiai.  aiga.  1  Cor.  J 5:  52,  fV  i^  tGyuiri  Gayniyyi. 
Comp.  Rev.  11:  J8,  o  xuigog  tw^  veitgc^v.  v.  15,  o  i(3dofiog  ayXeXog 
iGulniGe.  See  >§»  3.  111.  4.  No.  1.  Acts  17:  31,  i'crri^Wi/  rnxigav. 
Comp.  <§>  65. 

Xil.  John  6:  39,  44,  54,  avaGtriGM  amov  iv  rrj  iGyuttj  ^f^igtx 
I  will  raise  him  at  the  last  day.  1  Cor.  15:  23,  24,  fha  to  zikog 
then  cometh  the  end.  Then  will  come  the  time  of  the  resurrection, 
when  the  human  family  shall  no  longer  either  be  propagated  by 
generation,  or  diminished  by  death  (Mark  12;  25.  Luke  20:  35, 
36  ;)  when  the  new  order  of  things,  o  aio]v  ixeTvog  v.  35,  shall  take 
the  place  of  the  old,  alwvog  tovzov  in  a  word,  the  end  of  the  pres- 


1  Annotat.  ad  Kantii  Philosoph.  de  rel.  doctrinam,  §  II.  p.  6. 


^61.]  RESURRECTION  OF  THE  BODY.  373 

ent  terrestrial  life  of  man,  Iv  ztJ  avvxeliiif  tov  aidovog.  Malt.  13:  39, 
49. 

XIII.  If  the  resuscitated  body  were  not  the  residence  (2  Cor.  5: 
1)  of  the  same  spirit  to  which  it  was  formerly  attached  (v.  10,)  it 
would  not  be  the  body  of  the  blessed,  to  whom  it  had  previously 
belonged  ;  nor  would  it  be  the  same  persons,  who  are  raised  from 
the  dead  (John  5:  29,  ol  la  ayaO^a  not^aavieg.  6:  40,  ol  Tiiozfv- 
Gccvzeg)  viz.  those  that  do  good — that  believe  ;  nor  could  it  be  cal- 
led their  resurrection.     1  Cor.  6:  14.  2  Cor.  4:  14  etc. 

Those  who  reject  the  idea  of  the  resurrection  of  the  human  body, 
regard  the  expressions  '^resurrection,"  "raising  the  dead,"  etc, 
partly  as  figurative  representations  of  immortality,  taken  from  the 
Jewish  language  and  Jewish  notions,  (such  are  Des  Cotes,  Ammon, 
Tieftrunk,  and  Eckermann  ;)  and  partly  as  signifying  a  moral  re- 
surrection of  the  unreformed.^  John  5:  21,  24,  28.  In  Hammer's 
Dissertation  entitled,  Mortuorum  in  vitam  revocatio  sermonibus 
Christi  historicae  interpretationis  ope  vindicata,  Leipsic,  1794,  the 
literal  interpretation  is  defended  against  Ammon,  with  the  following 
arguments: — 1.  iyslgeitf  tovg  vixgovg 'xal  C(fionoi(7v  to  raise  the 
dead  and  to  make  alive,  is  predicated  of  the  Father,  in  its  proper 
literal  sense,  in  v.  21  ;  and  the  same  must  also  be  applicable  to  the 
Son,  for  the  works  of  the  Father  are  attributed  to  him. — 2.  The 
expressions  "  in  the  graves,"  "  the  resurrection  of  life"  (v.  28,) 
could  not  well  have  been  understood  by  the  hearers,  in  an  allegori- 
cal sense ;  as  the  whole  discussion  is  neither  poetic  nor  allegorical. 
— 3.  Christ  classes  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  with  his  ful^ova 
iQya,  or  greater  works,  in  reference  to  his  healing  on  the  Sabbath 
day,  V.  5 — 16.  These  "  greater  works"  must  necessarily  have  been 
such  as  were  subjects  of  ocular  observation,  such  as  the  Jews  ex- 
pected of  their  Messiah. — 4.  The  supposition,  that  Christ  intended 
to  describe  the  moral  resurrection,  with  figures  drawn  from  Dan.' 
12:  2,  is  not  only  destitute  of  proof,  but  is  actually  improbable  ;  for' 
there  is  not  a  single  word  which  gives  the  least  intimation  of  such 
an  allusion  ;  moreover,  the  words  are  not  those  of  Daniel,  nor  is 
Daniel,  in  the  passage  to  which  we  refer,  at  all  speaking  of  a  moral 
resurrection.^ 

In  Fichte's  Critique  on  all  Revelations,  the  resurrection  of  the 
body  is  represented  as  an  instance  in  which  the  divine  Word  conde- 
scends to  the  comprehension  of  man  ;  and  in  order  to  render  our 
future  existence  comprehensible  to  us,  represents  it  in  all  its  pres- 
ent relations  and  circumstances.     In  reply  to  this,  Siiskind  has  ob- 

1  Allgemeine  Deutsche  Bibliothek,  B.  III.  S.  374. 

2  OpuHC.  Acad.  Vol.  III.  p.  141.  etc.  153. 


374  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 


served^  "  The  supposition  that  Jesus  himself  meant  nothing  more 
by  resurrection,  than  the  immortality  of  the  spirit,  because  tlie 
proof  adduced  by  him  ajijainst  the  Pharisees  (Luke  20:  38)  is  said 
to  refer  only  to  immortality  and  not  to  tlie  resurrection,"  is  removed 
by  the  following  interpretation^  of  this  text :  "  Concerning  the  res- 
urrection of  the  dead,  which  has  been  denied  by  you  (Pharisees,) 
upon  the  ground  that  the  dead  have  no  longer  any  existence  at  all, 
1  would  remind  you  of  that  passage  in  which  God  declares  that  he 
is  the  God  of  Abraham  who  has  been  dead  a  long  time.  The  dead 
therefore  most  certainly  do  still  exist,  and  therefore  their  bodies  also 
can  be  raised  to  life  again,  eyel^oviat.' " 

XIV.  John.  5:  29.  (§58.  III.  7.)  Rev.  20:  15. 

XV.  1  Cor.  15:51,  7]i:ie7g  {ol  ^oiififg)  uUayrjao^ie&cc  we  (the 
living)  shall  be  changed.      1  Thess.  4:  15 — 17. 

XVI.  Chanore  of  the  earth. — Rom.  8:  23.  comp.  v.  19.  Ac- 
cording to  this  passage  "  the  deliverance  of  the  creature  [of  creation] 
from  the  bondage  of  corruption,"  will  fall  within  the  time  of  *'  the 
revelation  [glorious  liberty,  sonship]  of  the  sons  of  God.  Rom.  8: 
23.  comp.  19  etc,  ehudf^matg  zijg  ailaiojg  ano  Trjg  dovXilug  Ttjg 
qjitogag — cc7ioi(dXviiJig  {ikivOd^iu  Trig  d6'if]g,  vtoO^eGlu)  to)v  viwv  lov 
ihov. 

According  to  Rev.  20:  12  (comp.  v.  11,)  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead  will  fall  within  the  time  in  which  the  earth  shall  vanish  before 
him  that  sits  upon  the  throne,  itfuyevi^yij.  After  the  resurrection, 
there  will  be  a  new  earth  xuci^t'i  ytj  21:  1.  This  transformation  in 
Heb.  12:  27,  is  called  (.isiaOiaig  a  change,  transmutation. 

The  different  later  explanations  of  the  word  njiaig  creature  or 
creation,  on  the  meaning  of  which  the  sense  of  the  whole  passage, 
Rom.  8:  23,  depends,  are  the  following: — 1.  The  whole  visible 
creation,  nature.  This  explanation  is  here  assumed,  and  is  also 
adopted  by  Koppe. — 2.  Irrational  creatures — Michaelis. — 3.  Jews 
and  Gentiles  in  general,  who  had  not  yet  professed  Christianity ;  or 
the  Jewish  and  pagan  inhabitants  of  the  city  of  Rome  and  the  sur- 
rounding country. — 4.  Mankind  in  general,  as  far  as  they  are  sen- 
sual.— 5.  Unbelieving  Jews. — 6.  Gentile  and  Jewish  Christians. — 
Schleusner,  Lex.  art  yiTtoig  no.  3. — 7.  Gentile  Christians. — 8.  The 
Jewish  Christians  in  Palestine. 

Several  of  the  older  explanations  may  be  found  in  Nachtigairs 
Dissert,  on  Rom.  8:  19 — 24.  The  objections  against  the  explana- 
tions Nos.  4  and  8,  are  stated  in  Flatt's  Dissert.  Annotatioues  ad 
loca  quaedam  Epistol'ae  ad  Romanos.     The  author  there  proves, 

3  SUskind's  Appendix  to  the  translation  of  the  Annotationes  in  Kantii  philos. 
de  religinne  doctrinam.  p.  176.  Note  61. 
S  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata,  Note  56. 


^61.]  "  CONSUMMATIO  SECULr."  876 

that  those  explanations  are  not  only  founded  on  an  unauthorised 
meaning  of  the  word  xTiotg,  but  that  the  predicates  also  which  are 
applied  to  -ATiaig  (v.  19 — 22,)  are  inconsistent  with  the  sense  adopt- 
ed in  those  explanations.  And  the  same  objections  may  in  gei.eral 
be  urged  against  all  the  above  explanations  excepting  that  of  No.  1. 

XVII.  The  "  consummatio  seculi.'^ — This  great  change  is  not 
confined  to  the  earth,  but  also  extends  to  that  heaven  in  which  the 
stars  are  placed.  I  will  shake  not  only  the  earth  but  also  heaven — 
the  earth  and  heaven  fled  away — the  present  heavens  and  earth  are 
reserved  for  the  fire — the  heavens  and  the  elements  ;  or  rather  sun, 
moon  and  stars,  as  Bengelius  has  proved  in  his  Gnomon.  Heb.  12: 
26,  Gflot)  ou  fiovov  Trivy^v  aXXa  xal  rov  ovgavov.  Rev.  20:  11,  eqvyev 
tj  yfj  xai  6  ovgavog.  2  Pet.  3:  7,  ol  vvv  ovgavol  Y.al  ri  y^  Jiitijaavgta- 
fit'i/oc  fiat  nvgi;  comp.  with  v.  10,  ol  ovgavol — aioiysla. 

If  the  parts  of  the  new  world  are  to  be  connected  together,  it  is 
very  probable  that  no  great  revolution  could  occur  in  the  earth 
without  affecting  also  at  least  those  heavenly  bodies  which  are  in 
immediate  connexion  with  it.  This  remark  may  serve  as  an  argu- 
ment against  the  explanation  of  aioiyiia  (elements,  constituent 
parts  of  the  earth,)  given  by  Henke,  as  meaning  "  every  thing 
which  can  be  found  on  earth."  Bengelius,  in  support  of  his  ex- 
planation, appeals  to  passages  in  other  writers,  and  to  the  fact  that 
sun,  moon,  and  stars  are  mentioned  at  the  dissolution  of  the  world 
just  as  they  were  at  the  creation  of  it,  as  well  as  to  the  circumstance 
that  in  2  Pet.  3:  10,  there  is  a  specific  mention  of  the  earth  (>J  yn 
xtti  id  Iv  avirj  egya.)  The  w-hole  of  this  change  is,  in  Systematic 
Divinity,  termed  consummatio  seculi. 

XVII I.  The  burning  elements  shall  be  dissolved — the  earth 
■  shall  be  burned — the   heavens  being  on   fire  shall  be  dissolved.     2 

Pet.  3:  7,  10 — 12,  aiotx^la  xavoovfAfva  ?,vOr}a6Tttt,  (r>;xfr«t) — yr^ 
xaianarjafiac — ovgavol  nvgovfievoi  kv&t'jaoviai. 

XIX.  Rom.  8:  21.  (see  111.  16.)  That  those  things  may  re- 
main which  cannot  be  shaken — there  shall  be  no  more  death,  for 
the  former  things  are  passed  away.  Heb.  12:  27,  iV«  /if/V?;  tci  {ayi 
GaUvofASfa,  Rev.  21:  4,  ^dvaxog  ovy.  I'aiat  lit — on  xu  ngcUta  ctntjl- 
&0V.  Rom.  8:  21.  (see  111.  16.) 

XX.  A  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth—  I  make  all  things  new. 
Rev.  21:  1,  ovgupog  aacvog  nal  y^  aatvrj.  2  Pet.  3:  13. 

XXI.  Matt.  5:  12,  o?'p«i/o?  heaven,  (comp.  with  v.  3,  10.)  19: 
23,  ^aadfla  toiv  ovgavoitf  kingdom  of  heaven,  (compare  v.  23.)  6: 
20.  (comp.  with  33.)  Luke  12:  33,  32. 

XXII.  By  kingdom  of  Gorf— [kingdom  of  heaven,]  is  in  this 
place  meant  especially  that  part  of  the  universal  empire  of  God 
which  shall  be  the  residence  of  his  faithful  subjects  after  the  res- 
urrection. 


376  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

XXIII.  Matt.  13:38,41,43.  The  earth,  xoa^off,  shall  then 
after  it  has  been  purified,  constitute  that  part  of  the  kingdom  of 
Christ  and  of  God  (Eph.  5:  5,  ^aoikeia  Xgiatov  xal  {>6ou  Rev.  11: 
15.  ^aoiXela  tou  xvqiov  rjfAcoi^  '/mi  jov  Xqigtov  umov)  in  which  the 
righteous  shall  shine,  ol  dixuwt  },dfixpovoc.  Here  also  shall  the 
righteous  enjoy  heavenly  possessions  (1  Pet.  1:  4.  Col.  1:  5.  3:  1, 
2.  Heb.  10:  34,)  just  as  they  did  in  the  other  parts  of  the  empire 
of  God,  which  they  inhal)ited  before  the  resurrection  of  the  dead 
and  renovation  of  the  earth.  For,  their  new  residence  in  the  king- 
dom of  God  is  intimately  connected  with  those  portions  of  it  which 
they  formerly  inhabited.  Heb.  12:  28,  nagaXau^di'Ovzfg  ^aoiUlav 
aadXevTOv  "  as  we  are  removed  into  a  kingdom  which  cannot  de- 
cay." In  the  Dissert,  de  regno  coelesti^  it  is  remarked,  that  by 
^^  the  unchangeable  kingdom,"  may  be  meant  the  new  heaven  and 
the  new  earth,  to  which  allusion  is  made  in  v.  26.  comp.  1  Pet.  3: 
13.     Rev.   21:  3,  tJ  gx7]vi]  xov   <>iov  (Jistd  tmv  dv&gcauMv.  v.  1,2, 

-  the  new  Jerusalem  which  cometh  down  from  heaven  to  earth. 

XXIV.  Your  names  are  written  in  heaven — our  walk  is  in  heav- 
en, whence  also  we  expect  the  Saviour — and  seated  us  together  in 
the  heavens.  Luke  10:  20.  Phil.  3:  20.  Ephes.  2:  6.  All  these 
expressions  designate  citizens  of  heaven.     Heb.  12:  22. 

XXV.  Our  bodies  shall  be  *'  heavenly — the  image  of  the  heaven- 
ly— a  building  of  God — a  house  in  the  heavens — heavenly  habita- 
tion." 1  Cor.  15:  48.  2  Cor.  5:  1  etc.  That  the  expressions 
"  heavenly,"  "  in  the  heavens,"  and  "  from  heaven"  are  synony- 
mous, is  shown  in  the  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata,  Note  20.  Like  the 
angels  of  God — who  always  see  the  face  of  their  heavenly  Father. 
Luke  20:  36.  Matt.  22:  30. 

XXVI.  Matt.  25:  34.  comp.  13:41.  (111.  23.)  Gen.  1:26,  they 
(men)  shall  govern  the  whole  earth.  Ps.  115:  16,  God  gave  the 
earth  to  man. 

XXVII.  We  await  a  new  earth — we  shall  reign  on  the  earth — I 
will  write  upon  him  the  name  of  the  new  Jerusalem,  which  cometh 
down  from  heaven.     2  Pet.  3:  13.  Rev.  5:  10.  3:  12.  21: 1—3. 


Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  I.  p. 


*J  62.]  PERFECTION  OF  THE  BLESSED.  377 


SECTION  LXII. 

Future  growth  of  the  blessed  in  intellectual  strength  and  moral 

excellence. 

The  blessed  spirits  shall,  as  well  previously  to  the  resurrecticn  as 
subsequently (1)  to  it,  be  favoured (2)  with  the  peculiar  presence  of 
Christ, (3)  and  thus(4)  of  God. (5)  In  this  situation  under  the 
special  influence  of  Christ,  and  in  the  very  advantageous  circum- 
stances in  which  the  righteous  shall  be  placed  in  the  future  world, 
(6)  they  will  not  only  be  delivered  from  that  natural  depravity  with 
which  they  were  formerly  infected  ;(7)  but  their  holy  dispositions 
will  be  confirmed, (8)  and  the  ardor  of  their  zeal  be  still  more  in- 
creased, by  the  success  of  the  plans  in  which  they  are  engaged. (9) 
Thus,  not  only  does  the  society  of  perfectly  pure(lO)  raen(ll) 
and  angels(12)  prove  a  source  of  contentment  and  pleasure  ;  but  it 
is  also  an  important  auxiliary  to  our  advancement  in  intellectual  and 
moral  excellence.  (13)  And  the  glorious  possessions  of  the  future 
world  in  general, (14)  which  the  blessed  shall  themselves  enjoy,  and 
over  which  they  shall  be  governors  for  the  benefit  of  others,(15) 
will  afford  them  numerous  opportunities  for  the  exercise  of  their 
!ove(16)  and  fidelity, (17)  as  well  as  for  advancing  in  that  knowl- 
edge and  adoration  of  God,  which  constitute  a  large  portion  of  their 
felicity.(18) 

Illustrations. 

I.  That  the  advantages  of  the  blessed  in  theit  state  before  and 
after  the  resurrection,  which  are  mentioned  in  this  section,  will  ac- 
tually be  enjoyed  by  them,  is  proved  in  the  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata, 
p.  23,  27,  >§,  IV.     See  also  <§.  60.  111.  9. 

II.  Rev.  7:  15,  they  are  before  the  throne  of  God.  v.  17,  the 
Lamb  that  is  in  the  midst  of  the  throne  shall  feed  them.  21:  3,  22. 
22:  3—5. 

III.  John  14:  3,  that  where  I  am  ye  may  be  also.  1  Thess.  4: 
17,  we  shall  be  ever  with  the  Lord.  V.  14,  God  will  lead  the  dead 
(in  the  Lord  Jesus)  with  him  (Jesus)  where  he  is.^     1  John  3:  2, 

1  Dissert,  in  Epistolas  Pauli  mlnores,  p.  29,  30. 
48 


378  OF    MAN.  [bk.  Ill, 

dxp6[ia&a  auTov  nw&cog  iait  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is.  The  pronoun 
*'  him"  refers  to  Jesus,  who,  we  are  told  here  as  well  as  2:  28,  shall 
appear,  and  who  is  spoken  of  also  in  3:  3,  5.  (see  «§>  42,  and  the 
work  on  the  Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John  etc.  p.  205.)  This 
passage,  as  well  as  the  two  preceding,  refers  to  the  perfected  con- 
dition of  the  blessed,  after  the  resurrection  ;  but  their  state  imme- 
diately after  death  is  spoken  of  in  2  Cor.  5:  8,  to  be  at  home  with 
the  Lord.  The  following  passages  refer  to  both  :  John  17:  24,  I 
will  that  those  whom  thou  givest  me,  be  with  me  where  I  am.  12: 
26,  where  I  am,  there  also  shall  my  servant  be.  V.  24.  v.  32, 1  will 
draw  all  unto  me  ["  I  will  make  all  men  my  servants,  without  res^ 
pect  of  nation,  and  bring  them  to  the  place  whither  I  now  go."j* 
Heb.  12:  14,  without  holiness  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord. 

IV.  John  14:  6 — 9,  he  that  hath  seen  me,  hath  seen  the  Fath- 
er. 

V.  John  14:  2,  In  my  Father's  house.  Matt.  5:  8,  they  shall 
see  God.  God  is  indeed,  himself  inaccessible  and  invisible,  dngo- 
GtTog,  dogazog  (1  Tim.  6:16.  1:17.)  Still  he  may  give  to  the 
citizens  of  heaven,  many  evidences  of  his  presence  (Matt.  18:  10) 
which  are  given  to  none  on  earth.  He  has  revealed  himself  in  the 
most  perfect  manner,  since  the  time  that  Christ  appeared  as  man, — 
the  most  perfect  revelation  of  the  divine  nature  to  man,  is  found  in 
his  eternal  union  to  a  rational  creature,  in  so  close  a  manner  that  he 
himself  is  seen  in  this  creature. 

VI.  The  reader  may  consult  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the 
Death  of  Christ,  p.  580,  where  the  very  important  influence  of  the 
new  situation  in  which  the  inhabitants  of  heaven  are  placed,  is  dis- 
<;ussed. 

VII.  Ephes.  5:  27,  that  he  might  present  to  himself  the  church 
having  neither  spot  nor  wrinkle.  The  soul  of  the  blessed  is  de- 
livered by  death  from  the  disordered  body.  Rom.  7:  23.  «§>  56.  111. 
1.  2  Cor.  5:  8.  And  the  body,  which  is  subsequently  united  to 
the  soul,  is  renovated  (1  Cor.  15:  42.)  and  thereby  purified  from 
all  its  former  imperfection  (Rom.  8:  23,)  and  qualified  for  partici- 
pation in  that  better  life  to  come,  and  in  that  gracious  influence  of 
Christ  which  is  not  found  in  this  Ife.  2  Cor.  5:  6.  1  Cor.  15:  44 
—49. 

VIII.  2  Tim.  4:  6—8.  Comp.  Heb.  12:  23,  nve^fAata  dcxalo)v 
zitakiicofitvoDv  "  the  spirits  of  the  blessed,  who  have  reached  the  ob- 
ject of  their  earthly  career  and  education." — Comp.  Rev.  3:  12, 
JO  vcxMv — xtti  I'^to  01)  ^n]  HiX&ri  tti.  From  these  passages  we  may 
infer,  that  in  the  world  to  come  our  exertions  for  improvement  in 
moral  excellence,  will  not  be  accompanied  with  dangers  and  sacri- 1 


1  Ueber  den  Zvreck  Johannis,  S.  18. 


^  62,]  PERFECTION  OF  THE  BLESSED.  379 

fices  ;  and  consequently,  that  our  holy  zeal  will  be  constant.^  For 
if  a  relapse  of  the  blessed  were  to  be  feared,  their  contest  could  not 
be  said  to  terminate  with  this  life ;  nor  could  their  conduct  in  the 
present  life  be  the  measure  of  their  future  reward. 

IX.  Matt.  5:  6,  ;fo^raai9^7j(7oi/ra*  {ol  diipcovzeg  dixaioavvfjv.) 

X.  Luke  16:  26.  13:  27.  Matt.  13:  30,  40—43,  48.  25:  32. 
(compare  §58,  111.9.)  22:  11 — 13,  where  the  guest  without  a 
wedding  garment,  was  commanded  to  be  cast  out.  1  Pet.  1:  4,  an 
undefiled  inheritance.  2  Pet.  3:  11 — 13,  a  new  heaven  and  a  new 
earth  in  which  dwells  righteousness.     Rev.  22:  14,  15. 

XI.  Luke  19:  22  etc.  Lazarus  with  Abraham,  in  the  abode  of 
the  blessed.  13:  18,  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  all  the 
prophets,  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  Matt.  8:  11.  2  Thess.  2:  1,  our 
assembling  with  him  (Christ.)  1  Thess.  4:  17.  (see  111.  2.)  5:  10, 
that  we  should  live  together  with  him — "that  we  all,  as  w^ell  the 
dead  as  those  now  living,  might  live  in  felicity  together  with  him."^ 
1  Cor.  15:  29,  "  how  unreasonable  would  it  be  to  deceive  ourselves, 
with  the  expectation  of  an  eternal  and  blessed  existence  with  Jesus 
and  our  friends  imep  vexgajp,  if  there  were  no  existence  beyond  the 
grave. "^  Rev.  7:  9,  until  the  number  of  their  fellow-servants  and 
brethren  should  be  fulfilled.  Heb.  12:  23,  ye  are  come  to  the 
spirits  of  the  just  made  perfect. 

XII.  Luke  20:  36,  laccyytlol  dai  they  are  like  unto  the  angels. 
Col.  1:  20,  "  by  the  death  of  Christ,  God  wished  to  unite  the  in- 
habitants of  earth  and  heaven  [ra  tnl  trig  yrjg  kcu  xd  h  rolg  ovgavoTg'^ 
together,  and  subject  them  all  to  the  government  of  Christ."  Heb. 
9:  23,  "  It  was  necessary  that  we  should  be  qualified  by  the  blood 
of  Christ,  to  enter  into  the  holy  place  in  heaven,  or  to  attain  the 
society  of  the  perfect  spirits  in  heaven."  Heb.  12:  23,  "  ye  are 
come  to  the  general  assembly  of  the  most  ancient  inhabitants  of 
heaven,  I  mean,  to  the  many  thousands  of  angels."  Rev.  7:  11^ 
all  the  angels  (just  like  the  blessed  dead)  stood  around  the  throne 
of  God."  Thus  also  will  wicked  men  be  condemned  to  the  society 
of  wicked  spirits.  (•§>  51.  111.  4.)  The  passage  Zech.  3:  7,  also, 
might  be  adduced  in  proof  of  the  union  of  good  men  and  angels,  if 
the  exegesis  of  the  passage  were  not  doubtful.'* 

XIII.  See  the  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata,  »§.  6,  7. 

XIV.  In  Luke  16:  10,  these  possessions  or  blessings  are  called 
nokv  and  to  (xkf]div6v,  in  opposition  to  earthly  goods,  which  are 
comparatively  ilaxtaiov  etc. 


1  Opuscul.  Vol.  II.  p.  116.  etc. 

2  Dissert,  in  Epist.  Pauli  minores,  p.  30,  31. 

3  De  notione  regni  coelestis,  Note  72. 

4  Hess' History  of  the   Israelites,  Pt.  II.  p.  309;  and   Stattdlin'i  llluBtrationt. 
©ftheProphets,  p.  312. 


380  OF  MAN.  [bk.  iir. 

XV.  Luke  16:  11,  12.  Matt.  25:  21,  23, 1  will  place  thee  over 
many  things.  Luke  19:  17,  be  thou  ruler  over  ten  cities.  V.  19, 
be  thou  over  five  cities. 

XVI.  1  .Cor.  13:  8,  love  never  faileth. 

Xyil.  Luke  16:  10—12,  maiog  fiiithful.  Luke  19:  7—19, 
ntOTog  tytvov  thou  hast  been  faithful.  Matt.  25:  21,  23,  ^ouA;  ntan 
thou  faithful  servant. 

XVIII.  1  Cor.  13,  10 — 12,  when  that  which  is  perfect  is  come, 
then  that  which  is  imperfect,  "  in  part,"  shall  be  done  away — then 
we  shall  see  face  to  face.  Ephes.  4:  13,  "  until  we  all  attain  to  a 
conviction  concerning  Jesus  Christ,  to  a  knowledge  of  the  Son  of 
God,  until  we  attain  the  maturity  of  manhood  ;  i.  e.  until  we  be- 
come a  perfect  church  of  Christ,  which  shall  embrace  among  her 
children,  none  who  shall  again  become  wavering  in  their  knowledge 
ofChrist."^ 


SECTION  LXIII. 

Different  grades  of  future  happiness. 

This  everlasting{l)  happiness  is  bestowed  on  men  in  different  de- 
grees. (2)  And  the  degree  of  happiness  conferred  on  each  individ- 
ual, will  depend  on  his  conduct  during  his  whole  life,  and  on  the 
circumstances  in  which  he  was  placed  ;(3) — on  his  natural  temper- 
ament, his  talents  and  means  of  doing  good, (4)  but  particularly  on 
the  degree  of  his  fidelity(5)  in  the  use  of  all  his  powers  and  means 
to  promote  his  growth  in  moral  excellence. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Luke  16:  9,  provide  for  yourselves  friends  with  the  unsatis- 
fying mammon  [give  to  the  pious  poor  some  of  that  unsatisfying 
wealth,  which  is  often  unrighteously  possessed,]  that  when  ye  de- 
part (from  this  world  and  arrive  in  the  world  to  come,)  they  may  | 
receive  you  into  everlasting  habitations,  uimvui  axi]val,  [they  may, 
such  of  them  as  have  reached  the  place  of  departed  spirits  before 
you,  return  your  kindness  by  welcoming  you  into  the  abodes  of  the 
blessed.]  v.  12,  to  vnitfgov.  12:  23,  a  treasure  in  the  heavens  that 
faileth  not.     1  Thess.  4:  17,  we  shall  be  ever  with  the  Lord.     2 

1  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis  nXfjgwfia,  p.  15.  Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  I.  p.  159. 


^^  63.]  DIFFERENT  DEGREES  OF  HAPPINESS.  38l 

Cor.  4:  17,  an  eternal  weight  of  glory.  18,  the  things  that  are  not 
seen,  are  eternal.  Rom.  2:  7,  eternal  life.  1  Tim.  1:  10,  life  and 
immortahty  [incorruption,  aqjO^agala.]  1  Pet.  1:  4,  an  inheritance 
that  is  incorruptible.  1  John  2:  17,  he  that  doth  the  will  of  God, 
abideth  forever.  Luke  1:  33.  comp.  Rev.  3:  21.  ({>  64.)  Heb. 
7:  25,  Christ  liveth  forever,  to  make  intercession  for  them  that  come 
unto  God  through  him.  Heb.  10:  36,  an  enduring  substance  in  the 
heavens.  12:  28,  an  unmoveable  kingdom.  Hence,  the  bodies 
which  ai'e  to  partake  of  this  unchanging  happiness,  cannot  be  mor- 
tal— ''flesh  and  blood,"  "corruption"  (1  Cor.  15:50,)  but  they 
will  be  made  immortal.  1  Cor.  15:  51 — 54,42.  (see  §  61.) 

n.  1  Cor.  3:  8,  each  one  shall  receive  his  own  reward,  according 
to  his  own  labour.  Matt.  25:  40,  45,  twv  ilayjotcup  the  least.  1 
Tim.  3:  13,  ^aOfiov  iavzoJg  y.a?>ov  nsQnioiovviat>  they  provide  for 
themselves  a  good  grade  (or  station)  of  honour.  See  Matt.  5:  19, 
he  shall  be  considered,  y,Xr,d^riGiTai^  great  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

III.  2  Cor.  5:  10,  that  each  one  may  receive  the  things  done 
in  the  body.  2  Tim.  4:  7,  8.  comp.  v.  6.  In  terminating  our  life, 
we  finish  our  course  in  a  manner  which  entitles  us  to  a  prize  more 
or  less  honourable.  Gal.  5:  10.  Matt.  25:  35.  2  Tim.  1:  16— 
18.  Notwithstanding  the  progress  which  may  be  made,  during  the 
time  between  deatli  and  the  general  resurrection  ;  we  may  still  say 
with  propriety,  that  the  degree  of  Iiappiness  which  shall  be  bestow- 
ed on  inen  at  the  day  of  judgment,  is  dependant  on  their  conduct  in 
life,  because  even  that  progress  which  they  shall  make,  will  itself 
be  proportionate  to  their  situation  at  dca;h. 

IV.  There  is  some  disthiction  in  gifts  and  rewards. — Matt. 
25:  28.  comp.  with  v.  15:  17,  axaatcotdcDxf  xccrd  tiji>  id'lav  dui/afiiv 
"  he  confided  to  each  one  a  sum  proportionate  to  the  measure  of 
his  qualifications,  to  the  one  a  larger,  to  the  c.her  a  smaller  sum,  to 
trade  with  ;  and  that  servant  v/ho  was  mGZi  highly  gifted,  had  an 
advantage  over  the  other  servant,  though  h&  also  was  faithful  (comp. 
V.  23,  21.)  He  was  able  to  accompHsh  more  (v.  16,  20.  comp. 
with  V.  17,  22,)  and  was  fitted  for  receiving  a  niuch  greater  trust 
for  the  future  (v.  28.) 

Rom.  2:  10,  do'ia  navtl  rw  ipya^Oftti/M  to  ayaOov,  'JovSaico  ts 
ngaiiov  glory  to  every  one  that  doeth  good,  but  to  the  Jew  first. — 
Superior  abilities  and  privileges  can  certainly  advance  a  man  farther 
in  goodness,  and  thus  raise  him  to  a  higher  degree  of  happiness, 
than  is  attained  by  others.  But  the  superior  advantages  of  the  for- 
mer, will  in  no  wise  be  detrimental  to  the  happiness  of  the  latter. 

V.  In  Luke  ch.  19,  of  the  two  servants  of  equal  means,  that 
one  who  did  most,  was  preferred  to  the  other  (v.  18)  on  account  of 
his  superior  fidelity,    (v.  17,  24,  26,  19.)    2  Cor.  9:  6,  he  that 


382  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

soweth  sparingly,  shall  reap  sparingly ;  he  that  soweth  richly,  shall 
reap  richly.  2  Pet.  1:  11,  nXovalcog.  The  following  illustration  of 
the  position,  that  though  salvation  is  the  pure  gift  of  grace,  in  all 
instances,  yet  different  persons  may  partake  of  it  in  different  de- 
grees, is  found  in  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ : 
"  When  a  number  of  criminals  are  pardoned  and  restored  to  the 
privileges  of  citizens,  they  all  have  alike  access  to  all  the  blessings 
of  citizenship,  and  yet  some  of  them  may  avail  themselves  of  these 
privileges,  more  than  others,  by  their  peculiar  talents  and  exertions,'* 
(p.  380.) 


SECTION    LXIV. 

Participation  of  the  righteous  in  the  blessedness  of  Christ, 

The  future  blessedness  of  the  righteous,  may  be  summarily  des- 
cribed by  saying,  that(l)  they  shall  partake  in  a  high,  though  not 
unlimited  degree,(2)  of  the  happiness  of  Jesus  himself.(3) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Among  the  many  brethren  of  Christ,  even  the  least  of  them 
shall  be  conformed  unto  the  image  of  the  Son  of  God — shall  be  co- 
heirs with  him.  Matt.  25:  40.  Rom.  8:  29,  av(if^ogq)ot  xilg  elxovog 
tov  vlov  [zov  d^eov.)  v.  17,  avyxl't^govo/noo  avxov  {Xqigtov.) 

II.  The  most  intimate  union  with  Christ  is  a  privilege,  by  which 
the  pious  of  the  human  family  are  distinguished  even  from  angels. 
See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  584. 

III.  John  17:  20 — 22,  the  glory  which  thou  gavest  me,  I  gave 
to  them  (that  believe.)  Matt.  25:  21,  23,  enter  into  the  joy  [mar- 
riage feast]  of  thy  Lord.  comp.  22:  2.  Rom.  8:  17.  (111.1.)  2 
Tim.  2:  10 — 12,  we  shall  live  with  him — we  shall  reign  with  him 
(Christ.)  (^  62.111.  11.)  2  Thess.  2:  14.  1  Cor.  1:9,  the 
fellowship  of  Jesus  Christ.  1  John  3:2.  1  Cor.  15:  49.  Phil.  3: 
21,  we  shall  be  fashioned  like  unto  the  body  of  his  glory  i.  e.  his 
glorious  body.  Heb.  3:  14,  iitioxov  yeyovafitv  tov  Xgiaiov 
"  through  Jesus  all  things  are  subjected  also  to  his  brethren  as  his 
coheirs  by  virtue  of  their  union  with  him,  in  as  far  as  they  are  capa- 
ble of  such  participation."^  Rev.  3:  21,  I  will  give  to  him,  to  sit 
with  me  on  my  throne. 

1  Zweck  desTodes  Jesu,  p.  584. 


^  65.]  CHRIST  THE  CAUSE  OP  OUR  SALVATION.  383 


SECTION    LXV. 

Christ  is  the  exclusive  cause  of  our  salvation. 

The  reasons  why  the  future  felicity  of  the  Christian  consists  in 
a  participation  of  the  blessedness  of  Jesus,  is,  because  God  has  de- 
creed that  men  should  obtain  salvation  through  Christ  and  for  his 
sake.(l)  The  man  Jesus  is  particularly  appointed  to  be  the  Guide 
of  men  to  salvation ;  he  is  the  proper  and  immediate  cause  of  their 
salvation(2) — not  only  because  he,(3)  or  God  through  him, (4)  will 
actually  bestow  salvation  on  his  people,  nor  merely  because  Jesus 
Christ  receives  the  spirits  of  the  blessed  dead  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven, (5)  and- restores  their  bodies  to  hfe,(6)  and  as  judge  of  the 
family  of  man,  apportions  to  each  one  his  lot  ;(7)  but  because  he 
has  purchased  the  right(8)  to  make  us  partakers  of  his  blessedness. 
For,  just  as  the  first  man,  by  his  transgression,  lost  the  advantages 
which  he  had  possessed,  and  involved  himself  and  his  posterity  in 
misery  (<^  54—57)  ;  so,(9)  on  the  contrary,  did  Christ  Jesus,  by 
his  obedience,  purchase  the  right  {<§>  87 — 92)  to  use  his  exalted 
privileges  in  bestowing  salvation  on  men. (10)  But  this  subject 
will  be  more  fully  discussed  in  the  fourth  Book,  which  treats  of  the 
Redeemer  of  the  human  family. 

Illustrations. 

I.  That  salvation  is  bestowed  only  through  Christ,  and  on  the 
exclusive  ground  of  his  merits,  is  evident  from  the  following  nu- 
merous passages.  2  Tim.  1:  9,  who  hath  saved  us  and  called  us 
with  a  holy  calling,  not  on  account  of  our  works,  but  on  account  of 
his  own  purposes  and  the  grace  which  was  granted  us  in  Christ  Je- 
sus, before  the  world  began.  Eph.  1:  3—5,  who  hath  blessed  us 
through  Christ,  having  predestinated  us  to  sonship,  through  Jesus 
Christ.  Eph.  2:  7,  the  riches  of  his  grace  in  Christ  Jesus.  John 
14:  6,  I  am  the  way  (to  the  Father)  and  tlie  life.  6:  57,  he  that 
eateth  me,  shall  live  through  me.  1  John  4:  9,  that  we  might  live 
through  him  (the  Son  of  God).  5:  11,  and  this  testimony  is  this, 
that  God  has  given  us  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son.  John 
1:  12,  but  to  as  many  as  received  him  gave  he  power  to  become 
the  sons  of  God,  namely,  to  them  that  believe  in  his  (Christ's) 


384  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

name.  Gal.r^4:  7,  heirs  of  God  through  Christ.  Rom.  6:  23,  the 
gracious  gift,  xagiaiAa^  of  God,  is  eternal  life,  through  Christ  Jesus. 
1  Thess.  5:  9,  10,  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to  wrath,  but  to  ob- 
tain salvation  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  1  Pet.  5:  10,  God 
hath  called  us  to  his  eternal  glory  through  Jesus  Christ.  1  Cor. 
1:  4.  2  Tim.  2:  10.  Acts  4:  11,  12,  ov^  iaii  tv  a'AAo)  ovdivl  i]  aw- 
TYioia  (>J  tv  X,  J.)  ouie  yap  ovofAcc  taic  tctgov  Iv  m  d£7  0(t)x)r]vai>  T^/Aug 
neither  is  there  salvation  in  any  other ;  for  there  is  no  other  name 
under  hezven,  given  among  men,  whereby  we  could  be  saved.  In 
this  last  passage,  Gmirjpia  does  not  signify  the  cure  of  diseases,  as 
Teller  and  Michaelis,  in  reference  to  v.  10,  have  translated  it,  but 
its  meaning  is  salvation}  Peter  had,  on  another  occasion  (3:  12), 
referred  the  populace  to  the  cure  of  the  lame  man,  wrought  by 
Christ  (v.  6),  as  an  evidence  of  the  dignity  and  glory  of  his  person, 
and  as  a  reason  why  they  should  believe  in  him  as  their  Saviour  (v. 
21).  And  here  he  gives  the  same  explanation  before  the  Sanhe- 
drim. The  two  synonymous  clauses  of  v.  12,  give  a  stronger  ex- 
pression to  the  same  truth,  which  is  contained  alike  in  both.  From 
the  individual  fact  that  tlie  cure  of  the  lame  man  was  owing  to  his 
faith  in  Jesus,  is  inferred  the  general  proposition,  that  the  hopes  of 
men  in  general  centre  in  Christ.  JEv  avOgwnoig^  is  here  used  for 
the  simple  dative  ui^dgconoig. 

II.  Acts  5:  31,  (xgx>iyog  xal  acazr/g,  i.  e.  ccg^r^yug  zTJg  conrjglag. 
The  Prince  and  Saviour,  i.  e.  PrincQ  of  salvation.  John  11:  25, 
the  resurrection  and  the  life.  Col.  3:  4,  Christ  our  hfe.  1:27, 
the  hope  of  glory.  1  Tim.  1:  1,  our  hope.  Heb.  2:  10,  the  Cap- 
tain or  Prince  of  salvation.     5:  9,  the  cause  of  eternal  salvation. 

III.  John  10:  28,  I  g-ve  them  eternal  life.     11:  25. 

IV.  John  17:  2,  as  thou  hast  given  him  power  over  all  flesh,  that 
he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given  him.  1 
Cor.  15:  57,  thanks  be  to  God,  who  g^^eth  us  the  victory,  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  2  Cor.  4:  14,  knowing  that  he  who  raised 
up  the  Lord  Jesus,  shall  raise  up  us  also  through  Jesus.  1  Thess. 
4:  14.  (see  *§.  62.  111.  2.)  John  5:  22,  27,  the  Father  gave  all 
judgment  to  the  Son.  Acts  17:  31,  he  (God)  will  judge  by  that 
man  whom  he  hath  appointed.  Rom.  2:  16,  God  shall  judge  the 
secrets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ.  1  Tim.  6:  14,  until  the  appear- 
ance of  Jesus  Christ,  whom  [God  shall  show]. 

V.  Jesus  Christ  will  perfect  the  happiness  of  the  blessed. — 2 
Tin).  4:  18,  The  Lord  shall  preserve  me  unto  his  heavenly  king- 
dom, comp.  v.  8.  1.  John  11:  26,  25.  Luke  23:  42.  Acts  7:  59, 
Lord  Jesus  !    receive  my  spirit.     The  souls  of  those  who  died  be- 

1  Dissert.  De  sensu  historico,  p.  |3.  Opilsc.  Acad.  Vol.  I,  p.  17.  Diss.  I.  in 
LibrosN.T.  hist.  p.  91,89. 


§  65.]  CHRIST  THE  CAUSE  OF  OUR  SALVATION.  385 

!  fore  the  time  of  Christ  and  obtained  salvation,  were  saved  for  Christ's 
sake.  Gen.  5:24.  Heb.  11:5.  (§  69.  111.  1).  Luke  20:37, 
where  the  salvation  of  Abrahant),  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob,  is  spoken 
of.  16:  23.  John  8:  56,  52.  (<§,  66.)  But  their  salvatton  has  re- 
iceived  an  accession,  since  the  man  Jesus  is  in  heaven  (§  97).  And 
itbe  saints  who  died  before  Christ,  will  receive  from  him  who  is  the 
I  first  that  ever  rose  from  the  dead,  their  bodies  which  were  subject- 
ed to  death  on  account  of  Adam's  sin.  1  Cor.  15:  20,  23.  Col.  1: 
18.  Acts  26:  23.  These  bodies  shall  be  in  a  renovated  form  ;  and 
rthus  the  ancient  saints  shall  receive  their  full  measure  of  blessed- 
ness. From  Christ,  the  salvation  of  all  men  shall  receive  its  con- 
'  summation,^  even  of  those  who  arose  shortly  after  him.^  Salvation 
shall  be  perfected  by  him,  at  the  time  of  the  general  resurrection 
and  judgment.^  Until  all  the  citizens  of  the  future  world  have  been 
born,  it  is  impossible  that  the  present  state  of  the  human  family, 
and  of  the  things  of  this  world,  «/wV  ovtos  Luke  20:  34,  should 
terminate,  or  that  the  expected  new  order  of  things  (<§>  61)  should 
begin,  in  which  being  born  and  dying  shall  no  more  be  found  (v. 
35).  But  when  the  new  order  of  things  begins,  the  salvation  of 
men  shall  receive  its  completion,  not  only  by  their  receiving  their 
bodies  (v.  35),  but  also  by  being  reinstated  in  the  possession  of 
their  original  residence  {^  61.  III.  16 — 23)  in  a  renovated  form 
adapted  to  their  life  of  future  happiness.  And  as  this  visible  world 
cannot  be  renovated,  until  all  the  citizens  of  the  future  world  are 
born  (2  Pet.  3:  13),  and  until  the  reformation  of  those  who  are  to 
be  sanctified,  shall  have  actually  taken  place  (v.  9)  ;  the  consum- 
mation of  the  happiness  of  the  blessed  dead  which  arises  from  being 
located  in  the  new  world,  must  necessarily  be  deferred,^  until  the 
time  of  the  last  generation  of  the  human  family  (§  61.  111.  13),  un- 
til the  majestic  appearance  of  the  Judge  who  shall  assign  to  the  risen 
dead  and  to  those  then  living,  their  residence  in  the  new-created 
world,  and  give  to  each  such  a  station  as  his  conduct  in  this  life 
may  justify.  2  Cor.  5:  10.  2  Tim.  4:  6—8.  Matt.  25:  34.  It  is 
for  this  reason,  that  this  "  last  time"  and  the  advent  of  the  Lord 
which  shall  follow,  are  so  frequently  represented  as  the  final  object 
and  end  of  their  most  important  expectations.  See  John  6:  39. 
14:  3.    1  Pet.  1:  5—9.    1   Cor.  1:  7.    Phil.  1:  6—10.    3:  11,  20, 

1  2  Tim.  4:8.  Heb.  11:  39,  40. 

2  Matt.  27:  5:5.  Hess'  Biography  of  Jesus,  Vol.  II.  p.  312,  363. 

3  In  John  5:  21,  22,  Christ  combines  lojottoisiv  and  xqIvuv.  v.  27,  29. — X(>tW 
and  the  dvdaraatg  will  be  at  the  same  time. — v.  28.  29,  the  resurrection  and 
judgment  will  be  on  the  last  day.  John  12:  48.  6:  39,  40.  2  Thess.  1:  7—12.  2: 
1.  comp.  1  Thess.  4:  15,  7.  2:  1.1  John  4:  15.  1  Cor.  15:  23.  Rev.  20:  11. 

4  Heb.  11:  40,  that  they  might  not  be  perfected  without  us.  See  comment  on 
Heb.  Note/,  in  loc. 

49 


386  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

21.  1  Thess.  1:  10,  to  wait  for  the  Son  of  God  from  heaven.  2: 
19.  3:  13.  5:  10,  4,  23.  1  Tim.  6:  14.  2  Tim.  1:  18.  4:  8.  Tit. 
2:  13.  Col.  3:  4.  1  John  3:  2.  4:  17.  Heb.  9:  28.  10:  25,  37. 
12:  26,  "  yet  once  more  I  will  shake  not  the  earth  only,  but  also 
heaven  ;  and  transform  heaven  and  earth  into  a  state  in  which  they 
shall  be  immutable."  2  Pet.  1:  16.  3:  4 — 14,  the  power  and  com- 
ing of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  When  the  apostle  Paul  animates 
the  Christians  by  the  prospect  of  happiness  after  the  resurrection,  he 
by  no  means  denies  that  they  will  be  happy  immediately  after  death  ; 
as  is  evident  from  those  passages  in  which  he  speaks  of  their  bles- 
sedness between  death  and  judgment.  2  Cor.  4:  14.  5:  6,  9,  10.^ 

VI.  John  5:  28.  6:  39—54.  Phil.  3:  20. 

VII.  For  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father, 
with  his  angels;  and  then  he  shall  reward  every  man  according  to 
his  works — he  is  the  Judge  of  the  living  and  the  dead,  appointed 
by  God — he  (God)  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  by  that 
Man  whom  he  has  appointed — we  must  all  appear  before  the  judg- 
ment seat  of  Christ — 1  charge  thee,  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
shall  judge  the  living  and  the  dead  at  his  appearing,  and  his  king- 
dom. Matt.  16:  27.  25:  31.  Acts  10:42.  17:  31.  2  Cor.  5:  10. 
2  Tim.  14:  1.  John  5:  22—27.  Rom.  14:  10.  1  Cor.  4:  5.  2 
Thess.  1:  7.  God  will  conduct  the  judgment  of  mankind,  through 
Jesus,  because  he  is  a  man  [John  5:  27,  oti,  viog  av&gojnov  tail, 
comp.  Acts  17:  31,  ttJ^»Jp.]  In  this  passage  of  John,  the  phrase 
"  Son  of  man"  is  used  without  the  article,  and  therefore  does  not, 
as  it  would  with  it,  mean  a  particular  and  distinguished  man,  the 
Messiah,  but  signifies  indefinitely,  a  man ;  as  in  Heb.  2:  6.  Mark 
3:  28.  The  phrase  o  viog  di>x>i)(07iov,  with  the  article,  designates 
tfie  man,  xai'  tE.op}v,  in  the  superlative  sense.'-^  There  is  a  certain 
day  appointed  for  the  awful  scene  of  judgment.  "  He  hath  appoint- 
ed a  day^ — judge  nothing  before  the  time,  until  the  Lord  come^ — 
in  the  day  of  wrath^ — then."*"  This  day  is  indeed  unknown  to  us. 
"  It  Cometh  as  a  thief  in  the  night.""^  It  is  the  day  which  is  also 
the  end  of  the  present  state  of  the  world,^  "  the  last  day."  On 
this  solemn  day,  the  whole  human  race  i'AaGxfa^  shall  be  judg- 
ed.    Nor  shall  there  be  any  exception  ;  but  all  who  have  ever  liv- 

1  Dissert,  de  Vita  Beata,  Note  28. 

2  See  Rev.  3:  \1 ,  6  xalainojQog  aaX  6  akssivosj  l»y  wfiich  is  meant,  the  Son  of 
man  whose  history  is  mentioned  in  Dan  7:  13.  See  Dissert,  in  Libros  N.  T. 
historicos,  p.  33.  Schleusner's  Lex.  art.  apd^QOJTtog  no.  3.  Schmidt's  Dissert,  in 
Henke  s  Mag.  Pt.  II.  p.  3.  No.  XVIII. 

3  Acts  17:  31.  4  1  Cor.  4:  5.  5  Rom.  2:  5.  6  Matth.  16:  27. 

7  Matth.  24:  36.  1  Thess.  5:  2.  2  Pet.  3:  10. 

8  Matth.  13:  40,  49.  John  12:  48.  Rev.  20   11.  2  Pet.  3:  7. 

9  Matth.  16:  27.  25:  32.  Rom.  2:  6, 16.  2  Cor.  5:  10.  Jude  15. 


^  65.]  CHRIST  THE  CAUSE  OF  OUR  SALVATION.  387 

ed*  upon  the  earthj^or  shall  then  be  yet  living,^  shall  be  included 
in  the  process,  which  shall  take  place  in  the  presence  of  the  an- 
gels."* At  this  judgment  Jesus,  who  is  now  invisible  on  earth  (Col. 
3:  3),  will  not  only  evince  his  presence  by  particular  instances  of 
his  agency  ;  but  the  man^  Jesus  will  himself  be  visible,  just  as  he 
was  formerly  visible  and  present  on  this  earth,  "  the  Lord  shall  de- 
scend from  heaven. "6  "  cpavtiGsxac  to  or^fxilov  zov  vlov  tov  av- 
dgmnov  iv  rw  ovgavca  the  Son  of  man,  this  wonder,  will  appear  vis- 
ible in  heaven.- '^  The  object  of  this  solemn  appearance  of  Jesus, 
is  to  display  to  the  world  his  greatness  and  his  glory.  Acts  1:  11, 
"  He  will  come  in  the  same  manner  as  ye  saw  him  ascend  to  heav- 
en."^ Then  the  wicked  who  shall  then  be  still  living  (1  Thess.  5: 
3),  and  have,  therefore  never  seen  his  invisible  glory ;  and  those 
who  shall  have  died,  but  had  not  been  admitted  to  the  presence  of 
the  Redeemer,  and  who  through  ages  of  futurity  shall  be  banished 
from  his  blessed  society  (Matth.  25:  41)  shall  have  at  least  an  op- 
portunity of  seeing  the  glories^  of  the  Redeemer,  and  of  being 
convinced  of  the  dignity  of  his  person  by  the  view  of  his  glory  and 
that  of  those  on  whom  he  bestows  his  salvation.  2  Thess.  1:  10, 
when  he  shall  come  to  be  glorified  among  his  saints  and  to  be  ad- 
mired by  all  them  that  believe.  1  Thess.  3:  13.  Heb.  11:  39. 
Col.  3:  4.  And  now,  at  least,  they  shall  be  compelled  to  acknowl- 
edge and  adore  their  Lord  through  whose  merits  (even  though  they 
had  not  heard  of  him)  they  might  have  been  saved,  or  whose  doc- 
trine they  rejected  when  preached  to  them,  and  whose  person  they 
refused  to  adore.  2  Thess.  1:  10,  "at  that  time  my  declarations 
concerning  your  salvation  will  be  confirmed  in  such  a  manner  that 
no  one  can  doubt  them."  Phil.  2:  10,  11,  that  at  the  name  of  Je- 
sus every  knee  should  bow,  of  those  in  heaven  and  those  in  earth, 
and  those  under  the  earth.  Matth.  26:  64,  "ye  shall  see  the  Son 
of  Man  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven,"  in  allusion  to  his  second 


•  Acts  17:  31.  2  John  5:  28,  all  who  are  in  the  graves.    Rev.  20:  12, 13. 

3  2  Tim.  4.  1.  2  Cor.  5:  9.  Acts  10:  42.  1  Pet.  4:  5. 

4  xMatth.  25:  31.  13:  41,  49.  16:  27.  2  Thess.  1:  7.  Jude  14. 
5  John  5:  27.  Acts  17:  31.  6  1  Thess.  4:  16. 

7  This  interpretation  is  defended  (in  Dissert.  I.  in  Lib.  N.T.  histnr.  p.  37.)  on 
the  following  grounds  :  a)  In  the  parallel  passages,  Luke  21:  27.  Mark  13:  16, 
we  find,  instead  of  "  the  sign  of  the  Son  of  man"  merely  the  Son  of 
man;"  and  Matthew  himself  explains  these  words  thus:  "they  shall  see  the 
Son  of  man." — b)Christ  is  called  a  miracle  or  wonder,  a7jfiuov/\n  other  passages 
also.  Luke  11:  30,  29,  14—16,  after  many  other  wonders,  arjfj,Ha  (Luke  21:  25) 
which  shall  be  seen  in  the  heaven  (Mutth.  24:  29),  Christ  himself,  the  greatest 
of  all  wonders,  shall  also  appear."  If  aTjfxelov  were  intended  to  mean  miracles 
wrought  by  Christ,  it  would  be  arjfj^Za.  The  genitive  in  this  case  is  genitive 
of  apposition  ;  as  is  arj(j,HOV  laosojg  in  Acts  4:  22 ;  and  1  Pet.  3;  4,  o  x^vTtrds  trjs: 
xci^Siag  avd-QCUTtos'  instead  of  TtQimrds  avd-QtuTtog,  t}  xa^Sia. 

8  Heb.  9:  28.  9  Matt,  25:  31.  Luke  9:  26.  2  Thess.  1:  7. 


388  OF  MAN.  [bk.  jir, 

coming.  In  this  solemn  manner,  shall  this  honour  which  God  has 
appointed  him,  be  shown  to  Jesus  and  redound  to  the  glory  of  God. 
Phil.  2:  9.  John  5:  23.  Heb.  2:  9,  "  the  present  power  and  do- 
minion of  Jesus,  asures  us  of  the  future  subjection  of  all  things  to 
him."  In  this  solemn  manner,  will  it  then  be  demonstrated,  that 
no  individual  was  lost  on  account  of  his  natural  depravity  in  which 
God  suffered  him  to  be  born  ;  but  that  God  in  his  mercy  had  pro- 
vided a  Redeemer  for  the  fallen  race  of  man,  whose  dignity  and  all 
sufficiency  can  then  no  longer  be  doubted,  in  view  of  the  splendour 
of  his  appearance  and  the  host  of  blessed  spirits  who  are  indebted 
to  him  for  their  salvation  (2  Thess.  1:  10,  12.  Col.  3:  4).  And  in 
this  awful  manner,  will  it  be  demonstrated  that  the  wicked  are  the 
cause  of  their  own  condemnation,  and  owe  their  misery  not  to  God 
but  to  themselves.  But  not  only  on  Jesus  and  on  God,  will  this 
scene  reflect  honour.  It  will  be  honourable  in  the  highest  degree^ 
to  the  saints  ;  he  they  shall  be  pronounced  the  beloved  of  Christ 
and  of  his  father,^  in  the  presence  of  the  angels^  and  of  the  whole 
human  family  :  and  shall  actually  receive  all  those  blessings,  the 
expectation  of  which  exposed  them  to  ridicule  and  contempt.  2 
Thess.  1:  10.  1  Pet.  1:  T. 

Christ's  second,  coming  i?  to  he  literally  understood. — Those  who 
deny  that  Christ  •yill  come  visibly,  to  judge  the  world,  do  not  all 
evade  the  natural  meaning  of  the  texts  in  question,  in  the  same 
way. — I.  Come  assert,  that  "  Jesus  did  not  mean  a  visible  advent. 
All  his  declarations,  such  as  Matt.  25:  31,  must  be  understood  as 
meaning  an  invisible  coming  to  promote  his  kingdom,  or  the  triumph 
of  Christianity  over  Judaism;  they  are  wholly  figurative."^  In 
reference  to  a  future  retribution,  they  contend  that  "  his  doctrine 
is  merely  this :  Our  lot  in  the  future  life,  depends  on  our  obe- 
dience or  disobedience  to  the  commands  which  Jesus  gave  us  in  the 
present  life  ;  and  a  future  life  may  be  expected  in  which  the  pious 
followers  of  Jesus  shall  be  eternally  happy.  This,  however,  was 
not  the  belief  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  They  adhered  to  the  com- 
mon Jewish  opinion  of  a  visible  advent  of  the  Messiah.  In  refuta- 
tion of  these  views,  the  reader  may  consult  the  Tiib.  gel.  Anzeig.^ 
Henke's  Magazine,^  and  Paulus'  Commentary.'^     The  following  are 

1  1  Pet.  1:  7.  5:  4.  2  Tim.  4:  8.  Rom.  2:  7,  10.  1  Cor.  4:  5.  2  Thess.  1:  12. 
Col.  3:  4.  1  John  3:  2.  Opuscul.  Vol.  II.  p.  102. 

2  Matt.  40:  34.  3  Luke  12:  8.  Rev.  3:  5.    20:  12,  15. 

4  Eckermann's  Theol.  Beitrage,  B.  2.  St.  2.  S.  209,218.  Ammon,  on  the 
Declarations  of  Jesus  concerning  his  coming  to  judgment.  New  Theolog. 
Journal,  Vol.  3.  No.  3,  p.  185. 

5  For  1793.  No.  58,  p.  461. 

«  Vol.  II.  No.  2,  p.  393.  Vol.  V.  No.  3,  p.  538.  ^  Pt.  III.  p.  380,  484. 


^  65.]  CHRIST  THE  AUTHOR  OF  OUR  SALVATION.  389 

the  principal  arguments  against  the  figurative  interpretation  of  the 
declarations  of  Jesus  concerning  his  advent. — 1.  The  declarations 
of  Jesus  expressly  assert  a  visible  advent,  and  in  the  strongest  terms. 
— 2.  His  hearers  could  not  well  have  understood  him  as  meaning 
any  thing  else  than  a  visible  appearance. — 3.  These  declarations 
(such  as  Matt.  25:  31)  were  addressed  to  his  disciples,  and  if  they 
are  to  be  interpreted  figuratively,  he  ought  certainly  to  have  given 
them  some  intimation  of  it. — 11.  "  The  declarations  of  Jesus  rela- 
tive to  his  second  coming  cannot,  indeed,  without  violence,  be  inter- 
preted in  a  figurative  manner  ;  but  Jesus  accommodated  himself  to 
the  ideas  of  the  Messiah,  entertained  by  his  contemporaries,  only 
correcting  them  in  some  respects."  This  opinion  is  maintained  by 
the  author  of  a  Historico-critical  Dissertation  on  the  declarations  of 
Jesus  concerning  the  Messiah's  kingdom.  It  is  refuted  in  <5>  13,  111. 
2. —  III.  "  Jesus  himself  was  somewhat  attached  to  the  erroneous 
ideas  of  his  contemporaries,  relative  to  the  nature  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom  ;  and  in  his  declarations  concerning  his  second  coming 
and  the  circumstances  connected  with  it,  he  was  indeed  sincere,  and 
uttered  the  sentiments  of  his  heart ;  but  in  these  matters  he  cannot 
be  our  guide."  This  opinion  is  refuted  by  the  evidences  of  the  un- 
limited authority  of  Jesus  which  are  considered  in  <§»^  6 — 8. 

VIII.  Eph.  1:6,  7,  he  hath  made  us  accepted,  [ixoiQiTCJOsv  be- 
stowed his  grace  upon  us]  through  the  beloved  (Christ,)  by  whom 
we  have  redemption,  through  his  (Christ's)  blood.  Rom.  3: 24.  5:  1, 2. 
.;  IX.  1  Cor.  15:  21.  Rom.  5:  1,  11—19,  21.  Compare  «§>  59. 
"^  X.  1  Cor.  15:  48,  etc,  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the  earthy, 
we  shall  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly  also. 


SECTION   LXVI. 


The  salvation  purchased  by  Christ j  is  intended  for  all  men. 

The  purpose  of  God,  not  to  consign  men  to  punishment, (1)  but 
to  bestow  salvation  on  them  through  Christ,  is  just  as  universal  as 
is  that  mortality  which  is  derived  from  Adam  (Rom.  5:  12 — 19.) 
Accordingly,  God  intended  salvation  through  Christ,  deliverance 
from  the  innate  depravity  of  our  nature  and  the  evils  connected  with 
it  (such  as  the  terrors  of  death,  §  60 — 64,)  not  only  for  a  few  indi- 
viduals or  nations,  but  for  the  entire  mass  of  mankind, (2)  not  ex- 
cepting even  those  who  had  died  before  the  advent  of  Christ.(3) 


090  OV  MAN.  [bK.  Ill, 


Illustrations. 

I.  1  Thess.  5:  9,  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to  wrath,  but  to 
obtain  salvation  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

II.  Christ  tasted  death  for  every  man;  the  atonement  is gener- 
«/.— In  the  passages,  Matt.  26:  28.  20:  28.  Heb.  9:  28.  Rom.  5: 
15 — the  word  noXkol  many,  does  not  presuppose  another  part  of 
the  human  family  to  whom  the  declaration  contained  in  those  pas- 
sages, cannot  be  applied.  But  the  object  of  this  word,  is,  to  re- 
move a  limitation  of  the  declaration  to  a  few,  or  to  any  particular 
people  ;  such  as  was  the  limitation  of  the  Old  Covenant  to  a  single 
nation,  in  opposition  to  the  New.  Math.  26:  28.  Heb.  9:  15,  18. 
8:  6.  That  this  is  here  the  signification  of  the  word  many,  is  evi- 
dent from  other  prssages,  in  which  "all"  is  used  instead  of  it  (Rom. 
5:  15,  19);  as  is  the  case  in  v.  18,  elg  nawag  dv^gumovg  slg drAaiu)-- 
Giv  ^(x)^g  .(even  so,  by  the  righteousness  of  one,  came)  unto  all  men 
justification  of  life.  1  Tim.  2:  1 — 6,  who  (God  our  Saviour)  will 
have  all  men  to  be  saved  and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth.  4:  10,  for  therefore  we  both  labour  and  suffer  reproach,  be- 
cause we  trust  in  the  living  God,  who  is  the  Saviour  of  all  men  and 
especially  of  them  that  believe.  Tit.  2:  11,  for  the  grace  of  God 
that  bringeth  salvation  (i.  e.  the  saving  grace  of  God)  hath  appear- 
ed unto  all  men.  2  Cor.  5:  15,  and  that  he  (Christ)  died  for  all. 
V.  19,  God,  through  Christ,  reconciled  the  world  unto  himself.  1 
John  2:  2,  and  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours 
only,  but  for  the  whole  world.  John  6:  51,  I  am  the  living  bread, 
which  came  down  from  heaven  ;  if  any  man  eat  of  this  bread,  he 
shall  live  forever ;  and  the  bread  which  I  shall  give,  is  my  flesh, 
which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world.  3:  16,  for  God  so  loved 
the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  every  one  who 
belie veth  in  him,  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life.  1: 
29,  the  next  day  John  seeth  Jesus  coming  unto  him,  and  saith,  Be- 
hold the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world. — 
Heb.  2:  9,  but  we  see  Jesus,  who  was,  for  a  little  while,  put  lower 
than  the  angels,  who  for  the  sufTerinor  of  death,  was  crowned  with 
glory  and  honour,  that  according  to  the  gracious  purpose  of  (jod, 
he  might  taste  death  for  all  men. 

III.  The  atonement  was  made  for  those  also  who  died  before 
the  death  of  Christ. — This  is  evident  from  the  universality  of  the 
,  atonement,  which  is  equal  to  the  universality  of  death  and  all  the 
miseries  entailed  on  us  by  Adam.  Rom.  5:  18,  19.  corap.  v.  12 — 
14.  Hence  it  is  certain,  that  by  "  the  sins  that  are  past"  (Rom. 
3:  25,)  and  "  the  transgressions  under  the  first  Covenant  (Heb.  9: 
15,)  are  meant,  not  only  the  sins  of  persons  then  living,  but  in 


^  66.]  SALVATION  PURCHASED  FOR  ALL.  391 


general  the  sins  of  those  who  had  lived  before  that  time.^  The 
same  doctrine  is  taught  also  in  Heb.  9:  25,  26,  "  Christ  was  not 
under  the  necessity  of  offering  himself  frequently  since  the  begin- 
ning of  the  world,  or  of  bringing  a  particular  offering  for  every  age  j 
but  now,  once  for  all,  he  hath  appeared  at  the  end  of  the  world,  to 
offer  himself  a  sacrifice,  that  the  punishment  of  sin  might  be  remov- 
ed." God,  in  his  goodness  and  mercy,  bestowed  pardon  and  sal- 
vation on  those  righteous  also,  who  died  before  the  time  of  Christ's 
sufferings  ;  but  their  judicial  or  legal  liberation  from  the  punishment 
lof  sin,  and  their  legal  admission  to  the  eternal  inheritance,  they  did 
not  receive  until  after  the  death  of  Jesus.^  To  this  subject  refers 
also  the  passage  1  Pet.  3:  18 — 20,^  in  reference  to  which  we  re- 

1  See  the  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  562— 567. 

2  Tlie  work  on  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  562—567. 

[3  Of  this  very  difficult  passage,  we  shall  give  the  views  of  several  eminent 
critics,  and  leave  the  reader  to  make  his  own  choice.  The  first  is  that  of  the 
learned  and  pious  Hebrew  scholar,  Schoettgen,  who,  regarding  the  phrase 
noQivd-alg  iiiij(jv^iv  as  a  Hebraism  (similar  to '^jiVn  ViT:Ji — by  the  LXX,  2  Sara. 
5:  10,  xcd  SuTTo^svero  Aa^lS  TTo^evdfitvog  xal  ^fitya^vvo/uevog ;)  Ttvei/naTa  as 
meaning  men  irv general ;  (pvlamy  as  referring  to  civil  oppression  and  servitude 

ito  Satan  ;  and  placing  o.  period  after  a7taid^7]aaai ;  and  reading  oW^  with  the  Ge- 
neva edition,  Erasmus,  and  others  ;  gives  tlie  following  sense  :  *'  For,  it  is  better 
if  such  be  the  will  of  God,  that  ye  suffer  for  well  doing  than  for  evil  doing.     For 

[Christ  also  once  suffered  for  our  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring 

Ids  to  God,  being  put  to  death  in  his  human  nature,  but  made  alive  in  his  divine, 
in  which  he  continued  (by  his  apostles)  to  preach  unto  the  enslaved  and  unbe- 
lieving minds  of  men.  For,  once  before,  in  the  times  of  Noah,  God  waited  with 
longsuffering,  for  the  repentance  of  men,  while  the  ark  was  building,  in  which 

i(as  they  did  not  repent)  only  a  few,  namely,  eight  souls,  were  saved  from  the 
water.  But,  now  there  is  a  different  kind  of  flood,  namely,  baptism,  (which  does 
not  destroy  us,  but)  wiiich   saves  us  (and  which  is  not  the  putting  away  of  the 

!  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the   answer  of  a  good  conscience  toward  God)  by  the  res- 

j  urrection  of  Jesus  Christ." — Another  version  is  this  :  "  For  it  is  better,  if  it  be 
the  will  of  God,  that  ye  suffer  for  well  doing  than  for  evil  doing  ;  for  Christ  also 

[once  suffered  for  our  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God, 

.  being  put  to  death  in  the  flesh  (i.  e.  his  human  nature,)  but  raised  (in  spirit,  with 
a  spiritual  body,)  in  glory,  in  which  he  went  and  proclaimed  (his  death  nnd 
glorious  resurrection)  to  those  ransomed   spirits  in  the  days  of  Noah,  who  were 

[at  first  incredulous  for  a  while,  whilst  the  longsuffering  of  the  Lord  delayed 
(the  punishment,)  during  the  time  the  ark  was  building,  (but  who  afterward, 
when  they  saw  the  waters  risihg,  repented  before  they  were  drowned,)  in  which, 
few,  that  is,  eight  persons  were  saved  from  the  water.  In  like  manner,  now 
also  it  (water)  saves  us  in  baptism,  which  resembles  it  (the  flood.)  and  is  not  the 
mere  washing  away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  access  to  God  with  a  good  con- 

jscience  through  the  resurrection  of  Christ."  This  is,  in  substance,  the  interpre- 
tation of  Dr.  Storr;  and  for  the  grounds  on  which  it  rests,  the  reader  is  referred 

tto  his  invaluable  work  on  the  Object  of  the  atonement.  But  both  these  version* 
Jcviate  considerably  from  the  common  acceptation  of  some  of  the  words  in  the 
Trltrinal.  A  version  which  should  be  better  supported  by  usage  and  accord 
3quiilly  well  with  the  context,  would  be  preferable.  Such  the  following  appears 
.0  be  :  "  For  it  is  better,  if  such  be  the  will  of  God,  that  ye  suffer  for  well  doing- 
Li)an  for  evil  doing  ;  for  Christ  also  once  suffered  for  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust, 
-liat  he  might  bring  us  to  God,  being  put  to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  made  alive  in 
the  spirit ;    in  which  also  he   went  to  make   proclamation  to  the  spirits  in  the 


392  or  MAN.  [bk.  hi. 

mark,  that  Jesus  would  not  have  gone  to  announce  the  joyful  news 
(4:  6,  evrjyy^Xiai^tj)  of  his  death  and  glorious  resurrection,  to  those 
ransomed  (iv  (pvkaxrj)  spirits  (who  repented  after  the  deluge  had  be- 
gun, before  they  were  drowned,)  if  they  were  not  interested  in  these 
events,  if  they  had  not  belonged  to  those  ddlxoig  unjyist  (v.  18)  for 
whom  he  died. 


SECTION    LXVII. 

Though  salvation  is  provided  for  all,  some  do  not  attain  it. 

But  it  does  not  follow  that  all  men  actually  attain  this  salvation 
(<5>  58,  65.)  For,  though  God,  in  mercy,  made  provision  that  the 
depravity  and  misery  to  which  mankind  were,  without  their  fault 
subjected,  should  not  of  itself,  prove  a  permanent  injury  to  any  in- 
dividual ;  nevertheless,  his  justice  required,  that,  though  the  bles- 
sings of  salvation  were  provided  without  distinction  for  all,  even  for 
ihose(l)  who  through  their  own  fault  fail  ultimately  to  attain  them; 
(2)  no  one  should  actually  obtain  possession  of  them  who  had  con- 
tinued, until  the  hour  of  death,  until  the  time  of  actual  admission  to 
the  enjoyment  of  the  heavenly  blessings  purchased  by  Christ,  to  be 
unfaithful  in  the  use  of  those  talents  which,  notwithstanding  the 
universal  weakness  of  men,  were  still  entrusted  to  him. (3)  Still, 
by  virtue  of  the  same  love  which  prompted  God  to  provide  salva- 
tion for  all  men,  he  wills  that  no  one  may  be  found  guilty  of  un- 
faithfulness. (4) 

Illustrations. 

I.  That  Christ  died  for  those  also  who  shall  be  lost,  is  taught  in 
1  Thess.  5:  9  etc.  comp.  3:  5,  where  Paul  presupposes  it  as  possi- 
ble that  his  exertions  might  prove  fruitless.  Matt.  18:  11 — 14, 
even  so  it  is  not  the  will  of  your  heavenly  Father,  that  one  of  these 

place  of  keeping,  who  were  formerly  incredulous,  when  the  long  suffering  ofthe 
Lord  waited,  in  the  days  of  Noah,  and  while  the  ark  was  preparing,  in  which  | 
few,  that  is,  eight  persons,  were  saved  by  water  ;  by  which  now  we  also  are  sa-j 
ved,  in  the  antitype,  baptism,  which  is  not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the 
Hesh,  but  access  to  God,  with  a  good  conscience  through  the  resurrection  of|j 
Jesus  Christ.    S.] 


^  67.]  SALVATION  NOT  ATTAINED  BY  ALL.  393 

Uttle  ones  should  perish  see  v.  6.  etc.  Rom.  14:  15,  but  if  thy 
brother  be  grieved  on  account  of  the  meat,  thou  dost  no  longer 
walk  according  to  love.  Destroy  not  him  with  thy  meat,  for  whom 
Christ  died.  I  Cor.  8:  11,  and  through  thy  knowledge  the  weak 
brother  shall  perish,  for  whom  Christ  died.  2  Pet.  2:  1,  but  there 
were  false  prophets,  also,  among  the  people,  even  as  there  shall  be 
false  teachers  among  you,  who  introduce  destructive  sects,  and 
deny  the  Lord  that  bought  them,  and  bring  upon  themselves  swift 
destruction.  2  Pet.  1:  9.  Luke  22:  19.  Here  Jesus  does  not  ex- 
clude the  traitor  (v.  21)  who  was  lost  (v.  22,)  from  the  number  of 
those  for  whom  he  offered  his  body  and  shed  his  blood.  If  the 
conditions  of  pardon  and  salvation  are  not  fulfilled  by  men,  the  uni- 
versality of  the  pardon  itself  is  not  thereby  destroyed.  Thus, 
should  the  son  of  a  king  intercede  for  a  body  of  criminals,  and  ob- 
tain a  pardon  for  them  ;  if  the  pardon  is  procured  for  them  all,  and 
offered  to  them  all,  on  certain  conditions  to  be  performed  by  them, 
the  pardon  is  universal,  whether  they  all  avail  themselves  of  the 
benefits  of  it  or  not. 

II.  The  wicked  art  lost  because  they  refuse  to  accept  salvation. 
— Rom.  1:  18,  the  wrath  of  God  is  revealed,  v.  19,  because  that 
which  may  be  known  of  God  [a  knowledge  of  God]  is  manifest  in 
them.  V.  20,  that  they  may  be  without  excuse.  9:  32.  10:  16, 
they  have  not  all  obeyed  the  glad  tidings,  v.  21,  all  the  day  long 
have  I  extended  my  hands  to  a  disobedient  and  gainsaying  people. 
Acts  13:  46,  ye  judge  yourselves  unworthy  of  everlasting  life.  2 
Thess.  2:  10,  they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth,  that  they 
might  be  saved.  (Comp.  v.  12)  Matt.  23:  37,  O  Jerusalem,  Je- 
rusalem, thou  that  kiliest  the  prophets,  and  stonest  them  that  are 
sent  unto  thee,  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children  to- 
gether, and  ye  would  not.  Luke  19:  44,  thou  knewest  not  the 
time  of  thy  (probationary)  visitation,  imaitOTifjg.  7:  30,  the  Phari- 
sees and  lawyers,  by  not  being  baptized  by  him,  frustrated  the  coun- 
sel of  God  concerning  themselves. 

III.  Luke  16:  10.  19:  13,  15,  17,26.  Matt.  25:  19,  21,  23, 
26,  29.  1  Cor.  4:  2,  it  is  required  of  stewards  that  they  be  found 
faithful. 

IV.  Ezek.  18:  23,  "  should  I  take  delight  in  the  misery  of  the 
wicked  (says  Jehovah,)  and  not  much  rather  wish  that  he  should 
turn  from  his  ways  and  live  ?"  comp.  v.  32.  33:  11.  Luke  14:  21. 
Rom.  2:  4,  the  goodness  of  God  leadeth  you  to  repentance.  9:  22, 
^veyxfv  Iv  noXlri  fiaxgo&Vfiiqi  axe'vi]  op'/rjg  ycazrjgTiGfiiva  iig  anoiUictv^ 
"  God  had  borne  those  who  had  been  already  ripe  for  punishment, 
with  much  longsuffering  (in  order  that  they  might  reform.")  1 
Tim.  2:  4,  who  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved,  and  to  come  unto  the 

50 


3d4  OF  MAN.  [bK.  III. 

knowledge  of  the  truth.  2  Pet.  3:  9,  the  Lord  does  not  delay  the 
promise  (as  some  account  It  a  delay,)  but  he  is  longsufFering  toward 
us,  not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to 
repentance. 


SECTION   LXVIII. 

Little  children  also  are  saved  for  Chrisfs  sake. 

According  to  this  purpose  of  the  divine  will  those  who  die  in  in- 
fancy, and  to  whom  the  title  to  heaven  purchased  by  Christ,  be- 
longs no  less  than  mortality  (Rom.  5:  12,  18,  15),  will  undoubted- 
ly obtain  this  salvation. (1)  For,  unlike  the  wicked  (Luke  16:  10), 
they  have  not  lost  their  right  by  disobedience.  Nor  will  that  natu- 
ral depravity  be  laid  to  their  charge,  by  which  they  were  deprived 
alike  of  life  and  of  opportunity  to  evince  their  faithfulness  in  the 
use  of  their  talents  in  this  life.(2) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Mark  10:  14,  15,  tmv  yug  loiovicov  {naidlwp)  iattv  tJ  §aoi- 
Uia  Tov  d^eov  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  Children  must 
have  been  included  in  the  word  "  such,"  because  the  proposition 
*'  the  kingdom  of  God  belongs  to  humble  adults,  to  such  as  have  as 
little  pride  and  arrogance  as  children,"  would  be  no  reason  (yctg) 
why  children  should  not  be  prevented  from  coming  to  Jesus. — 
Children  partake  of  the  pardon  and  salvation  purchased  by  Christ, 
as  well  as  adults,  only  in  a  measure  commensurate  with  their  smal- 
ler capacity. 

II.  Depravity  of  Children, — Even  the  smallest  child  is  not  an 
undepraved  creature  of  God.  It  is  at  least  unworthy  of  being  trans- 
ferred into  the  society  of  the  citizens  of  heaven.  Its  mortality  is  a 
part  of  the  punishment  of  Adam's  sin,  in  which  all  mankind  partici- 
pate. The  remainder  of  this  punishment  is  remitted.  The  child 
is,  after  death,  treated  as  though  it  were  an  undepraved  creature  of 


^  69.]  ATONEMENT  EXTENDS  TO  CHILDREN.  395 

God,  as  though  it  were  not  under  the  curse  of  the  law.     It  is  re- 
ceived into  the  society  of  the  holy  angels.* 


SECTION    LXIX. 


Faithful  obedience  to  the  dictates  of  conscience  is,  in  adults,  the 
condition  of  participation  in  the  salvation  purchased  by  Christ. 

The  condition,  on  which  adults  or  those  who  have  attained  the 
use  of  reason,  obtain  the  salvation  purchased  by  Christ,(I)  is  faith- 
ful(2)  obedience  to  the  voice  of  conscience.  (Rom.  2:  12 — 15.) 
Conscience  urges  them  to  reverence  for  an  invisible  Judge,  whose 
being  and  attributes  they  can  learn (3)  from  his  visible  works,  with 
a  clearness  proportionate  to  the  degree  in  which  they  cherish  and 
obey  her  monitions.  These  are  moreover,  occasionally,  in  the 
providence  of  God,  excited  to  the  highest  degree  of  sensibility  by 
external  circumstances,  such  as  blessings(4)  or  misfortunes(5)  of 
unusual  magnitude. 

Illustrations. 

I.  To  these,  for  example,  belongs  En6ch.  Heb.  11:  5,'^vcox 
(AiTiiix^ri^  TOO  fit]  ide7tf  &avaTov  Enoch  was  taken  away  from  the 
earth  to  enjoy  eternal  salvation,"  see  *§>  65.^ 

II.  Heb.  11:  5,  God  took  Enoch  away,  because  he  had  long 
before  been  his  faithful  and  beloved  servant,  fief^agrvgrjiat,  ivtjQea- 
Tt]xtvatT€o^eM.  The  approbatory  sentence  relative  to  Enoch,  that 
'*  he  gained  the  approbation  of  God  and  served  him  iriN  ^Irnnn 
given  him  in  v.  22,  is  repeated  at  the  mention  of  his  being  taken 
away  (Gen.  ch.  5.)  According  to  Heb.  11:6,  Enoch  also  expect- 
ed a  future  retribution.  "  Those  also  who  lived  before  Christ,  (or 
since  that  time,)  and  yet  knew  nothing  of  a  Redeemer,  will  doubt- 
less partake  of  that  salvation  purchased  for  every  individual  of  the 
human  family,  if  they  have  only  cherished  a  faith  in  God  as  far  as 

1  [On  this  subject,  Whitby  makes  the  following  energetic  remark  :  "  Imo,  in- 
fantes poenis  aeternis  subjicere,  ob  peccatum  Adanrji,  estseverius  cum  iis  agere, 
quamcum  ipso  diabolo  aut  cum  Adamo  qui  peccatura  ipsemet  commisit."  S6e 
on  this  subject,  the  Theological  Dissertation  of  Dr.  Mosheim,  entitled,  "The 
salvation  of  christian  and  pagan  infants  demonstrated  ;"  Buddei  Theol.  Dog. 
Lib.  Ill,  cap.  II.  §  XXIV.  p.  591.    S] 

2  See  Storr's  Commentary  on  the  Heb.  in  loc.  Notes  m,  and  n. 


396  OF  MAN.  [bk.  liu 

their  circumstances  rendered  it  possible,  and  acted  in  obedience  to 
the  dictates  of  this  faith.  Nor  will  the  fact  that  they  knew  nothing 
of  this  atonement  prevent  its  application  to  them." 

III.  Rom.  1:  19—21.     Acts  14:  17.     Ps.  19:  2—4. 

IV.  Rom.  2:  3.  Job  33:  18,  25. 

V.  Luke  15:  14 — 17,  (parable  of  the  prodigal  son,.)  compare 
Job  33:  19  etc. 


SECTION    LXX. 

Provisions  of  God  for  the  promulgation  of  saving  truth  among 


men. 


God,  from  the  beginning,  promoted  the  dissemination  of  saving 
truth  by  various  special  instinictions  and  institutions.  (1)  After- 
ward, for  wise  purposes, (2)  he  confined  the  immediate  and  most  dis- 
tinct revelations  of  his  will  to  the  people  of  Israe](3)  only.  (4)  But 
even  this  limited  arrangement  was  frequently  the  means  of  diffusing 
religious  knowledge  among  other  nations. (5)  Its  principal  object 
was,  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the  whole  human  family, (6)  and  to 
pave  the  way (7)  for  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  which  were  in- 
tended indiscriminately  for  all  nations. (8) 

Illustrations. 

I.  See  <^  19.  HI.  3.  Reuss'  Opusc.  fasc.  II.  p.  115  etc;  and 
Zacharias'  Biblische  Theologie,  <§.  213.  Pt.  IV.  p.  5  etc. 

II.  Superstition  and  irrehgion  would,  even  among  the  descen- 
dants of  Abraham,  soon  have  suppressed  the  knowledge  of  God 
and  his  promises,  or  at  least  prevented  their  dissemination.  For 
they  only,  too  often  manifested  their  inclination  to  an  imitation  of 
the  Heathen.  But  God,  who  wished  his  revelations  to  be  preserved 
for  the  benefit  of  posterity,  prevented  this,  by  giving  them  the  Mo- 
saic law,  a  peculiar  government,  which  prevented  their  amalgama- 
tion with  other  nations. 

III.  On  the  subject  of  the  knowledge  possessed  by  the  Israelites 
before  the  time  of  Christ,  see  the  work  On  the  object  of  the  death  j 
of  Christ,  and  the  Commentary  on  Hebrews.     In  the  former  pas-  i 
sage,  it  is  shown  how  the  attentive  and  virtuous  Jew  could  be  in-  I 
structed,  by  the  laws  concerning  sacrifices,  which  referred  only  to  | 


^  70.]  GOSPEL  INTENDED  FOR  ALL  NATIONS.  397 

his  restoration  to  temporal  advantages  among  his  nation,  to  seek 
refuge  in  the  undeserved  mercy  of  God,  in  order  to  obtain  peace  of 
conscience  in  reference  to  his  future  destiny,  or  to  excite  in  him  the 
expectation  of  another,  better,  and  more  efficacious  scheme  of  mer- 
cy in  the  invisible  world. 

IV.  Ephes.  2:  14,  "  Jesus  took  away  the  law,  which  was  a  wall 
of  partition  between  the  Jews  and  Gentiles,"  ^isaotocxov.  Col.  2; 
14. 

V.  See  the  works  cited  in  HI.  1.  Occasionally,  some  of  the. 
adjoining  nations,  also,  were  instructed  by  teachers  sent  specially  to 
them,  e.  g.  the  inhabitants  of  Nineveh,  by  the  prophet  Jonah,  Matt. 
12:  41,  compare  Zacharias  sup.  cit.  p.  30,  41. 

VI.  Gen.  12:  3,  and  22:  18,  through  you — through  your  de- 
scendants— all  the  nations  of  the  earth  shall  be  blessed.  See  Hess, 
on  the  kingdom  of  God,  sect.  21 ;  On  the  people  of  Israel  viewed 
in  connexion  with  the  human  family ;  Connexion  between  the  pre- 
paratory and  the  main  institutions  of  God,  Pt.  II.  p.  5. 

VII.  The  Mosaic  religion  was  preparatory  to  the  Christian. — 
Gal.  3:  19 — 24,  o  vo^og  nutdaywyog  fjfxoiv  yiyovev  eig  Xgtoiov 
the  law  was  our  pedagogue  to  lead  us  to  Christ.  4:  1 — 3.  The 
written  mosaic  law  of  God,  placed  the  depravity  of  man  in  a  clear- 
er light,  by  expressly  declaring  the  wickedness  of  immoral  actions, 
and  by  preparing  the  Jews  for  a  more  grateful  reception  of  the  gra- 
cious dispensation  of  Christ,  inasmuch  as  they  saw  that  the  laws  of 
Moses  could  not  urge  them  to  the  fulfilment  of  their  duties. 

VIII.  The  christian  religion  was  intended  for  all  nations. — 
Matt.  28:  19,  go  ye,  therefore,  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  bap- 
tizing them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  24:  14,  this  Gospel  of  the  kingdom,  shall  be  preach- 
ed in  the  whole  world.  Luke  24:  47,  and  that  repentance  and  re- 
mission of  sins  should  be  preached  in  his  name,  among  all  nations, 
beginning  at  Jerusalem.  John  10:  16,  and  other  sheep  1  have  which 
are  not  of  this  fold  :  them  also  I  must  bring — and  there  shall  be  one 
fold  and  one  shepherd.  Acts  17:  30,  God  now  commandeth  all 
men  every  where,  to  repent.  1  Tim.  2:  4,  who  (God)  will  have  all 
men  to  come  to  a  knowledge  of  the  truth.  Rom.  1:  5,  from  whom 
we  have  received  grace  and  the  apostleship  for  the  dissemination  of 
the  faith  among  all  nations  for  his  name  see  v.  14.  10:  18,  their 
sound  (of  those  preaching  the  glad  tidings  of  peace)  went  through 
all  the  earth,  v.  15.  9:  24.  Eph.  1:  9 — 13,  nt^lv  to  us,  Jews,  vfAiv 
to  you.  Gentiles.  2:3,  he  hath  purposed— to  gather  together  into 
one  all  things  in  Christ.  3:  6—9,  that  all  might  see.  Col.  1:  5, 
whereof  ye  heard  before  in  the  word  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel, 
which  is  come  unto  you  as  it  is  in  all  the  world.     1:  23,  the  Gospel, 


398  OF  MAN.  [bK.  Ill 

which  has  been  preached  to  the  whole  creation  under  heaven,  v, 
28,  that  we  may  present  every  man  perfect  in  Christ  Jesus.  Mark 
16:  15,  go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every 
creature. 


SECTION    LXXI. 


Sahation  may  for  Chris  fs  sake^  he  extended  to  those  also  who  are 
not  acquainted  with  Revelation, 

The  reasons  why,  before  the  time  of  Christ,(l)  as  well  as  since 
his  resurrection,  so  many  nations  were  not  favoured  with  that  reve- 
lation(2)  which  was  given  to  the  Jews  and  also  to  other  nations  af- 
ter the  ascension  of  the  Redeemer,  are  as  little  known  to  us,  as  the 
reasons  of  many  other  things(3)  which  are  under  the  guidance  of 
divine  Providence  (Rom.  11:  33)  (4.)  But  this  we  know,  that 
only  from  him  shall  much  be  required,  to  whom  much  has  been  en- 
trusted ;(5)  and  that  to  entertain  a  different  opinion  concerning  the 
dealings  of  God,  would  be  irreverent.(6)  Hence  we  know  that 
those  who  have  enjoyed  but  few  means  and  helps(7)  to  piety  and 
virtue,  though  they  will  not,  if  disobedient,  escape  punishment(8) 
shall  be  "  beaten  with  fewer  stripes"(9)  than  those  who  had  been 
favoured  with  more  and  better  means  of  grace  and  incitements  to 
piety,  and  who  yet  neglected  them  ;  and  on  the  contrary,  that  those 
who  have  been  faithful  in  little,  will  hereafter  partake(lO)  of  the 
greater  blessings  purchased  for  them  also  by  the  Saviour,  in  a  de- 
gree commensurate  with  the  qualifications  which  they  have  here  at- 
tained.(ll) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Deut.  4:  7,  where  is  there  a  great  people,  to  whom  the  Lord 
gives  such  revelations  of  himself  as  to  the  people  of  Israel  ?  Ps. 
147:  20,  thus  has  he  done  to  no  other  people — the  other  nations 
know  not  his  laws.  Acts  14:  16,  in  times  past  he  suffered  all  the 
heathen  to  go  their  own  way. 

II.  Nature  of  the  Gospel  call. — ^Those  who  have  not  become 
acquainted  with  the  revelation,  are  not  among  the  xXi^iol  or  called^ 
For  those  who  are  "  called,"  are  those  who,  through  the  instrumen-i 


5»  71.]  SALVATION   OFFERED   TO   ALL.  399 

tality  of  some  means  of  instruction  appointed  by  God,  are  invited  to 
salvation,  and  to  a  course  of  thinking  and  acting  worthy  of  such  a 
calling.  2  Thess.  2:  13,  God  hath,  from  the  beginning  chosen  you 
to  salvation — whereuhto  he  called  you  by  his  own  Gospel.  1  Thess. 
2:  12,  God  who  called  you  to  glory  in  Christ  Jesus.  1  Pet.  5:  10. 
1  Tim.  6:  12,  called  to  eternal  life.  Phil.  3:  14,  I  press  toward 
the  mark  for  the  prize  whereunto  God  from  on  high  has  called  me 
in  Christ  Jesus.  Eph.  4:  4,  ye  are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  call- 
ing. Eph.  4:  1.  1  Thess.  2:  12,  that  you  would  walk  worthy  of 
God,  who  called  you  unto  his  kingdom  and  glory.  Luke  5:  32,  I 
came  not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repentance.  Nor 
does  the  reality  of  the  call,  depend  upon  the  fact  whether  they  ac- 
cept or  reject  it.  For  many  are  denominated  "  the  called,  j(«xA»?- 
uivov  (Luke  14:  16,24,18—20.  Matt.  22:  3,  8),  who  rejected 
the  call :  and  in  other  passages  (1  Cor.  2:24.  comp.  v.  13,)  this 
appellation  is  given  to  those  who  accept  the  doctrines  of  Christian- 
ity, in  contradistinction  from  unbelieving  Jews  and  Pagans.  Some 
of  the  called  embraced  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  with  sincerity, 
and  applied  them  to  the  advancement  of  the  salvation  of  their  souls,^ 
thus  becoming  genuine  members  of  the  people  of  God,  of  that  peo- 
ple who  love  their  God,  and  may  receive  eternal  salvation  from 
him.  Rom.  8:  28,30,  whom  he  called— he  glorified.^  1  Pet.  2: 
9,  t'&vog  uyvovj  Xaog  elg  negmoltjotv — tou  xaXtaavtog  vfictg  the  holy 
nation,  the  people  of  his  (God's)  property  [owned  by  God]  that  ye 
should  show  forth  the  praises  of  him  who  called  you.  Comp.  Rom. 
11:  29.  Is.  48:  12,  where  akrjaig'is  applied  to  the  reception  of  the 
Israelites  as  the  people  of  God.  And  some  of  the  "  called,''  on  the 
other  hand,  merely  gives  the  christian  doctrines  an  external  recep- 
tion, and  are  outwardly  attached  to  the  true  people  of  God  ;  for  we 
are  expressly  told,  that  many  are  called,  but  that  few  only  are  chos- 
en. 

III.  God  makes  men  to  differ  in  many  things. — But  the  dif- 
ference among  men  is  not  confined  to  the  circumstance,  that  some 
are  called  in  the  sense  defined  in  the  preceding  Illustration,  and 
others  not.  There  is  a  diversity  in  many  other  external  circum- 
stances, circumstances  which  exert  an  important  influence  on  the 
improvement  of  the  human  mind.  Their  talents  are  different,  their 
education  is  different,  the  society  to  which  they  have  access  is  differ- 
ent, and  different  also  are  the  peculiar  providential  circumstanges 
which  occur  in  their  lives. 

IV.  Nevertheless,  God  is  just,  and  wise,  andTgood. — It  is  cer- 
tain, that  in  the  divine  government  of  the  world,  there  is  no  partiality. 
Acts  10:  34,  then  Peter  opened  his  mouth  and  said,  Of  a  truth  I 

i  Rom.  9:  23, 24.    3  Tim.  1:  9. 1  Cor.  1:  7—9. 


400 


OF  MAN. 


[bK.  III. 


perceive  that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons  ;  but  in  every  nation, 
he  that  feareth  him  and  doth  what  is  right,  is  accepted  of  him. — 
Rom.  3:  29.  1  Tim.  2:  4—6.  Col.  3:  U.  And  it  is  certain,  not 
only  that  the  omniscient  and  wise^  Governor  of  the  v^^orld,  who 
alone  has  a  perfect  knowledge  of  the  situation  of  every  individual 
and  of  mankind  at  large,  chose  the  most  suitable  time  for  the  ap- 
pearance of  Christ;  but  also  that  he  determines  with  inscrutable 
wisdom  the  particular  periods  in  which  the  knowledge  of  the  truth 
is  diffused  over  the  different  nations  of  the  earth  in  greater  abun- 
dance. Tit.  1:  3,  he  manifested  his  word  in  due  times.  1  Tim.  2: 
6,  who  gave  himself  to  be  a  ransom  for  all ;  to  be  published  in  due 
time.  Gal.  4:  4,  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come,  God  sent  his 
Son  (iti  tjkd^s  TO  nXtjocofia  zou  ^govov  when  the  time  was  fulfilled  or 
had  arrived,  which  was  appointed  of  the  Father  (see  v.  2.)  comp. 
V.  2.  Rom.  11:30—34.2 

V.  Luke  12:  48,  to  whomsoever  much  is  given,  of  him  shall 
much  be  required.  That  unbelief,  dniatia  which  (according  to 
John  3: 18,  36,  Mark  16:  16,)  subjects  its  possessor  to  the  sentence 
of  damnation,  is  not  even  possible  with  those  who  have  never  heard 
the  Gospel.  John  15:  22.  Rom.  10:  14.  And  those  passages 
themselves  presuppose  in  the  unbeliever  an  acquaintance  with  the 
Gospel.  Comp.  John  3:  19,  32—34.  Mark  16:  15.  John  6: 
40.  14:  21.3  And  in  <^  74,  it  is  proved  that  Rom.  8:  29  etc. 
does  not  exclude  those  who  have  not  been  called,  from  the  hope  of 
salvation.  This  remark,  combined  with  Illustration  X  and  <§><^  69, 
72,  form  a  reply  to  the  objection  which  has  been  urged  to  the 
christian  religion  :  "  that  the  ethical  system  of  Jesus  appears  to  de- 
generate into  a  narrow  particularism  [sectarianism,]  by  teaching 
that  we  must  first  believe  in  Jesus  himself,  in  order  to  become  truly 
reformed  and  acceptable  to  God,  and  eternally  happy."  And  it 
likewise  affords  an  answer  to  the  question  "  what  are  the  prospects 
of  those  who  have  never  had  an  opportunity  to  hear  of  Jesus.  Are 
they  incapable  of  any  virtue  truly  acceptable  to  God  ?  And  what 
is  the  situation  of  those  who  have  indeed  heard  of  Jesus,  but  have 
been  unable,  though  sincere  in  their  inquiries,  to  convince  them- 
selves of  some  of  the  doctrines  which  he  taught,  e.  g.  relative  to  his 
person  ?  Is  faith  in  theoretical  doctrines  any  thing  of  a  meritorious 
nature  ?" 

VI.  Matt.  25:  24,  thou  wicked  servant,  thou  knewest  that  I  reap 
where  I  did  not  sow. 

VII.  Internal  divine  influence. — It  is  not  incredible  (<§>  37,  115) 
that  the  sensibility  of  conscience  may  also  be  awakened  and  render-, 

'  Rom.  16:  27.  comp.  v.  25.         2  Comp.  Reuss'  Opusc.  Fasc.  II,  p.  151—160    ! 
3  Object  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  685. 


^71.]  SALVATION  OFFERED  TO  ALL.  401 

ed  more  acute  by  the  internal  influence  of  the  omnipresent  God, 
upon  the  souls  of  those  who  are  obedient  to  her  first  emotions  ;  as 
well  as  by  the  contemplation  of  the  works  of  creation,  and  by  the 
strong  impression  made  upon  them  by  some  important  occurrences 
ifl  their  lives  (<§>  69.)  And  the  feelings  of  gratitude  to  God/  of 
reverence  for  him,  of  confidence  in  him,  and  of  longing  for  him,  can 
rise  beyond  the  sphere  of  distinct  knowledge  :  for  the  Spirit  helpeth 
our  infirmities :  for  we  know  not  what  we  should  pray  for  as  we 
ought,  but  the  Spirit  itself  maketh  intercession  for  us  with  groanings 
which  cannot  be  uttered.  Rom.  8:  26.  Nor  is  it  at  all  unworthy 
the  Redeemer  of  men  (1  Tim.  2:  3,)  to  give  additional  knowledge 
by  immediate  communication  to  such  conscientious  (Acts  10:  35) 
individuals  as  have  faithfully  improved  the  knowledge  possessed  by 
them ;  if  such  additional  knowledge  is  necessary  to  the  tranquillity 
of  their  minds  and  to  their  stability  in  the  course  of  virtue  and  re- 
ligion. Mark  4:  24,  unto  you  that  hear  shall  more  be  given  ;  for 
he  that  hath,  to  him  shall  be  given.  An  angel  was  sent  to  charge 
Cornelius  to  send  for  Peter  Acts  10:  1 — 6.  An  angel  directed 
Philip  to  go  the  w^ay  on  which  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  met  hira 
(Acts  8:  26  etc.  ;)^  and  Naaman,  the  Syrian,  became  acquainted 
with  the  prophet  Elisha.  in  a  natural  way,  without  the  intervention 
of  any  thing  miraculous.^ 

VIII.  Rom.  2:  12,  as  many  as  sinned  without  the  (written)  law, 
shall  also  perish  without  the  law.     Comp.  <§>  17.  HI.  1. 

IX.  Luke  12:  47.    Matt.  11:  21—24.     Compare  *§.  58.  111.  6. 

X.  Luke  16:  10.  Rom.  2:  10,  glory,  honour  and  peace  to  every 
one  that  doeth  good,  to  the  Jew  first  and  also  to  Greek.  Comp. 
^<§>  37,  115.  Reussii  opuscula  sup.  cit.  p.  144 — 151.  Hess' 
Bibliotheca  of  sacred  history,  p.  431.  Roesler's  System  of  doc- 
trines held  in  the  christian  church  during  the  first  three  centuries,  <^ 
XLIII. 

XL  Rom.  2:  10.  comp.  <§>  63.  III.  4.  Mori.  Epitome  Theologiae 
Christianae,  p.  128.  "  The  Scriptures  do  indeed  teach,  that  on 
those  who  become  acquainted  with  Christianity,  who  embrace  and 
practise  it,  God  will  bestow  a  very  high  degree  of  happiness  ;  but 
ihey  inform  us,  also,  that  God  will  judge  every  man,  with  a  just 
reference  to  his  individual  conduct  and  the  knowledge  which  he 
possessed.'* 

1  Acts  14:  17.  Rom.  1:21.  2:  4. 

2  Reussii  opusc.   Theol.  Fasc.  II.  p.  129,  139.  Cless'  Essay  on   tho   doctrinal 
system  of  the  New  Test.  p.  96.  Acts  11 :  14. 

3  2  Kings  5:  2  etc.  Michaelis'  Dog.  p.  528. 

'*  Diss.  II.  in  Apocal.  quaedam  loca,in  cap.  21:  12. 

51 


402  or  MAN.  [bk.  III. 


SECTION   LXXIL 

The  salvation  of  those  to  lohom  a  divine  revelation  was  given,  is 
suspended  on  their  faithfulness  in  the  use  of  it. 

Those  who  enjoyed  the  favour  of  a  divine  Revelation,  will  be 
judged  according  to  their  fidelity  in  the  use  of  this  important  aid.(l) 
For  as  a  distinguished  preference  was  given  them(2)  by  the  faith- 
ful use  of  which  they  might  have  attained  a  higher  grade  of  per- 
fection, and  thus  also  a  higher  degree  of  happiness  (Rom.  2:  10  ;) 
there  will  be  more  required  of  them,  and  their  unfaithfulness  wil] 
entail  on  them  a  severer  punishment. (3)  Whoever,  wilfully  and 
without  examination,  rejects  doctrines  published  to  him  by  divine 
authority,  or  at  least  pays  but  little  attention  to  them,  is  guilty  of 
disobedience  to  the  dictates  of  his  conscience  (<§>  69,)  and  is  there- 
fore in  point  of  faithfulness,  inferior  to  the  pagan  who  entertains  a 
reverence  for  the  Deity. (4)  And  as  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance 
to  us,  to  whom  the  christian  doctrines  have  been  made  known,  that 
we  make  a  proper  use  of  them  ;  we  shall,  in  the  fifth  Book,  enter 
into  the  particulars  of  this  subject. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Rom.  2:  12,  as  many  as  have  sinned  under  the  law,  shall 
be  judged  by  the  law. — John  12:  48,  the  doctrine,  loyog  which  I 
have  taught  shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day.  James  2:  12,  so  speak 
ye,  and  so  do,  as  they  who  shall  be  judged  by  the  law  of  liberty. — 
John  15:  22,  24. 

II.  Although  Cornelius  had  previously  been  ''  a  devout  man 
and  one  that  feared  God"  (Acts  10:  2,  4,  35)  his  being  made  ac- 
quainted with  Christianity  was  nevertheless  not  unnecessary  (Acts 
11:  14 ;)  but  the  opportunity  afforded  him  to  become  acquainted 
with  it,  was  given  as  a  reward  of  his  piety  (10:  4  etc.  31  etc.  34 
etc.)  It  is  represented  as  being  an  answer  to  his  prayers  (10:  4, 
31,)  as  an  evidence  of  the  divine  impartial  approbation  of  him  (v. 
35,)  and  as  a  dispensation  of  divine  providence  to  which  he  owed 
his  salvation.  Acts  11:  14,  call  for  Simon  Peter,  who  shall  tell  thee 
words  by  which  thou  and  thy  whole  house  shall  be  saved. 

III.  Luke  12:  47.  Matt.  10:  15.  11:  20—24.  Comp.  '^ 
58.  111.  6. 


I 


§  73.]  CONDITION  or  SALVATION.  403 


IV.  Those  to  whom  a  divine  revelation  has  been  given,  should 
ever  remember  that  they  owe  certain  duties  to  this  revelation  itself, 
as  well  as  to  that  light  of  reason  and  conscience,  which  they  have 
HI  common  with  the  pagan  world.^ 


SECTION    LXXIII. 


JS^eterthtless  the  salvation  of  Christians  cannot  he  merited  hy  their 

obedience. 

But  although  the  disobedient  shall  not  be  saved,  and  future  bles- 
i  sedness  will  be  bestowed  on  the  obedient  in   different  degrees,  pro- 
portionate to  their  faithfulness  in   this  life,  and  though  it  may  thus 
far(l)  be  regarded   as  the  reward  of  their  faithfulness,(2 ;)  still,  for 
our  salvation,  as  a  whole,  we  are  by  no  means  indebted  to  our  faith- 
fulness.(3)     It  is  the  gift  of  pure  grace,(4)  for  which  we  are  in- 
debted to  Christ(5)  and  to  the  divine  mercy  which  provided  for  us 
a  Saviour. (6)     The  future  blessedness  of  children,  who  have  not 
been  capable  of  evincing  faithfulness,  can  most  certainly  be  derived 
from  no  other  source  than  the  free  grace  of  God  through  Christ. — 
And  upon  the  same   foundation  will  every  one  rest  his  hopes,  who 
compares  impartially  his  own  faithfulness  with  that  future  blessed- 
ness which  is  provided  for  us. (7)    For  by  salvation  we  do  not  mean 
any  degree  of  happiness,  however  small,  which  should  be  mingled 
with  those  forebodings  naturally  excited  by  our  crimes ;  but  the 
remission  of  all  our  sins,  combined  with  a  freedom  from  all  pain  and 
the  enjoyment  of  heavenly  happiness.  We  speak  not  of  a  condition 
which  differs  but  little  from  our  present  lot,  but  of  such  an  exalted 
felicity,  as  men  could  not  without  the  greatest  presumption,  expect 
on  the  ground  of  their  own  merits. (8)     Who(9)  that  is  but  toler- 
ably acquainted   with  himself,  could   presume,  on   account  of  the 
holiness  and  other  moral  excellences  of  his  character,  to  lay  claim 
to  a  union  with  the  holy  angels  and  with  the  holy  Jesus  ?     Or  who 
could   presume   to  say  that  his   character  and   conduct  have  been 
such,  that  he  could  demand  a  glorious  renovation  of  his  soul  and 

I  Ueber  den  Zweck  des  Todes  Jewi,  p.  684.  >   .*  Uth  J/;  b 


404  OF  MAN.  [bK.    III. 

body  after  death,  and  an  admission  into  so  glorious  a  residence  as 
this  earth  will  be  after  its  transformation  into  "  a  new  earth  ?"  ^ 
61. 

Illustrations. 

1 .  Salvation  must  ever  he  considered  as  the  gift  of  the  free 
grace  and  goodness  of  God. — When  we  inquire,  who  shall  be  par- 
takers of  it,  and  in  what  degree  will  it  be  bestowed  on  particular  in- 
dividuals ;  we  always  presuppose  that  God  has  provided  for  sinful 
man,  an  undeserved  happiness.  The  question,  therefore,  amounts 
only  to  this :  On  what  conditions  can  we  become  partakers  of  this 
undeserved  gift  of  God's  grace?  It  is  certainly  pure  grace  that  af- 
ter mankind  had  fallen  so  low,  that,  in  consequence  of  their  natural 
depravity,  they  either  die  in  infancy  before  they  are  capable  of  fi- 
delity in  the  discharge  of  their  duties  (<§y  68),  or  if  they  attain  the 
ordinary  age  of  men,  still  never  arrive  at  that  degree  of  perfection 
which  they  would  otherwise  have  attained  ;  God  should  still  raise 
these  fallen  creatures  to  that  elevation  for  which  they  were  destined  in 
their  primitive  state,  and  propose  to  their  aim,  a  blessedness  bearing 
no  proportion  to  the  ruined  state  of  man.  But  although  this  des- 
tination to  so  great  a  happiness  is  not  dependent  on  the  faithfulness 
of  men,  it  is  not  inconsistent  either  with  the  law  or  with  justice.* ' 
For  the  degree  of  happiness  which  each  individual  rational  being 
may  attain,  does  not  depend  merely  on  his  fidelity,  but  on  the  pre- 
vious free  grace  and  goodness  of  the  Creator,  who  has  given  to 
each  one  a  particular  measure  of  talents  and  means  to  aid  him  in 
his  course  of  obedience;  and  who  has  appointed  a  kind  of  salva- 
tion, adapted  to  these  circumstances,  the  magnitude  or  the  loss  of 
which  depends  on  the  degree  of  their  faithfulness  or  unfaithfulness. 
The  only  peculiarity  in  men,  is  that  they  were  created  anew  by  Christ 
and  have  again  obtained  so  honourable  a  station  in  the  world  of  spirits. 
We  are  said  in  Scripture  to  be  created  a  new  people  through  Christ 
Jesus  and  his  death,  in  as  far  as  we  are  indebted  to  Christ  (Ephes. 
1:  7)  and  his  death,  for  our  translation  into  the  abodes  of  the  bles- 
sed spirits  (2:  5 — 7,)  or  for  our  exalted  destination  to  be  members 
of  the  people  of  God.  But  men  are  also  distinguished  from  the 
other  spirits  Ly  these  circumstances :  they  were  not  all  created  at 
the  same  time  and  placed  in  circumstances  in  which  their  will  was 
altogether  unrestrained  ;  but  one  is  begotten  after  another ;  this 
successive  generation  occasions  the  propagation  of  a  depraved  na- 
ture and  of  the  consequences  attendant  on  it.     "  But  to  no  class  of 

1  See  Schmid's  Moral  Philosophy,  p.  282,  No.  2. 


§  73.]  SALVATION  PURELY  BY  GRACE.  405 

sinful  creatures  was  it  so  natural  to  expect  that  the  righteousness  of 
another  should  be  imputed,  as  to  man,  whose  situation  was  most  en- 
titled to  commiseration,  inasmuch  as  he  had  been  brought  into  it 
by  the  disobedience  of  another."  Nevertheless  the  justice  of  God 
made  provision  that  the  disobedience  of  our  first  parents,  by  which 
their  descendants  were  brought  into  so  miserable  a  situation,  should 
not  be  regarded  as  a  trivial  evil ;  and  that  other  disobedient  persons 
might  not  make  the  grace  of  God  an  ostensible  pretext  to  justify 
their  levity.  This  end  was  effected  by  the  plan  of  salvation  which 
God  established  ;  namely,  that  the  family  of  man,  which  had  lost 
its  original  perfections  and  advantages  through  the  disobedience  of 
one  individual,  should  be  restored  in  no  other  than  a  moral  way 
(<5)  9-2  ;)  i.  e.  by  the  obedience  of  an  individual,  who  should  also 
suffer  the  punishment  of  that  apostasy  which,  by  virtue  of  our  nat- 
ural connexion  with  our  first  parents,  was  entailed  on  us  all,  and 
thus  liberate  us  from  this  punishment  (<§>  89 ;)  and  that  now,  since 
the  human  family  is  created  anew,  is  restored  to  that  state  in  which 
we  sinful  creatures  may  hope  to  attain  a  felicity  unmingled  with 
pain,  we  are  affected  by  precisely  the  same  law,  which  governs 
spirhs  who  have  never  fallen.  And  yet  that  the  underived  salva- 
tion which  God  had  through  mere  grace  appointed  for  man,  and 
which  man  had  lost  through  the  guilt  of  another,  is  refused  at  least 
to  the  disobedient,  and  is  bestowed  upon  others  according  to  the 
degrees  of  their  faithfulness.  <§>  67. 

On  this  subject  the  Reader  may  consult  Rapp,  On  the  moral 
spirings  of  action,  especially  those  contained  in  Scripture  ;^  and 
Flatt's  Remarks  on  the  proportion  between  morality  and  happiness  ; 
with  a  special  reference  to  the  christian  doctrine  of  the  future  hap- 
piness of  truly  converted  and  reformed  persons.  In  this  latter  work 
it  is  proved,  that  the  unmerited  happiness  promised  to  Christians,  is 
not  inconsistent  with  an  invariable  proportion  between  morality  and 
happiness.^ 

II.  Our  salvation  is  in  Scripture  sometime^  also  represented 
as  a  reward. — Matt.  5:  12,  rejoice  and  be  exceeding  glad,  for  great 
is  your  reward,  (Aca-Oog,  in  heaven.  16:  27,  then  he  shall  reward, 
anodcoaet,^  every  man  according  to  his  works.  Luke  10:  28,  and  he 
(Jesus)  said  unto  him  (the  lawyer,)  Thou  has  answered  right ;  this 
do,  and  thou  shalt  live.  6:  35.  comp.  10:  25.  2  Tim.  4:  7, 1  have 
fought  the  good  fight  etc.  henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown 
of  righteousness,  o  zrjg  dmaioovvrig  OTtcfavog.  Phil.  3:  14,  I  press 
toward  the  mark,  for  the  prize  whereunto  God  from  on  high  hath 
called,  through  Christ  Jesus.  Col.  3:  24,  knowing  that  of  the 
Lord  ye  shall  receive  the  reward  of  the  inheritance,  for  ye  serve 


1  Mauchart's  Repertoriuin,  B.  II.  S.  161.        2  Flatt's  Mag.  No.  2.  Vol.  2. 


406  OF  MAN.  I  [bk.  nifi 

the  Lord  Chjist.  Rom.  2:  6.  2  Cor.  5:  10.  Eph.  6:  8.  1  Cor.  3: 
8,  every  man  shall  receive  his  own  reward  according  to  his  own  la- 
bour. 15:  58,  therefore,  my  beloved  brethren,  be  ye  steadfast,  un- 
moveable,  always  abounding  in  the  work  of  the  Lord,  forasmuch  as 
ye  know  that  your  labour  is  not  in  vain  in  the  Lord.  Heb.  10:25. 
2  John  8,  be  careful  that  we  lose  not  those  things  which  we  have 
wrought ;   but  that  we  receive  a  full  reward. 

in.  Still  salvation  is  not  merited  by  our  worlds. — Tit.  3:  5,  but 
when  the  kindness  and  (philanthropy)  benevolence  of  our  Saviour, 
God,  appeared,  he  saved  us,  not  on  account  of  works  of  righteous- 
ness which  we  have  done,  but  on  account  of  his  mercy,  by  the 
"washing  of  regeneration  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which 
he  poured  out  upon  us  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour.  2  Tim. 
1:  9,  who  (God)  hatli  saved  us  and  called  us  with  a  holy  calling, 
not  on  account  of  our  works,  but  on  account  of  his  own  purpose 
and  the  grace  which  was  granted  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the 
world  began.  Eph.  2:  8,  for  by  grace  ye  are  saved,  through  faith, 
and  that  not  of  yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God  ;  Rom.  4:  2 — 6.  3: 
20 — 28.  9:  32,  not  of  works. — Without  works  etc. — to  him  that 
worketh  not  etc.  Gal.  2:  16,  knowing  that  man  is  not  justified  by 
the  deeds  of  the  law.  By  works  of  the  law,  tgycc  vofiov,  is  meant 
all  that  the  whole  Mosaic  law  prescribed  :  avrov  (Tovnazgog)  egyov^ 
i.  6.  TO  tgyov  6  l'd(x}y,t  fioi  6  ndirjg  ''  the  work  which  the  Father  had 
imposed  on  me,  or  which  the  Father  gave  me  to  do."  See  John 
17:  4.  For  we  must  not  apply  the  new  division  of  the  Mosaic  law 
into  moral  and  ceremonial,  to  the  discourse  of  the  apostle.  The 
ceremonial  observances  are  of  course  excluded  from  the  causes  of 
salvation.  But  so  also  is  the  observance  of  the  moral  precepts  of 
those  Mosaic  laws  (Rom.  2:  17 — 24,)  the  obligation  of  which  was 
known  before  the  Law  was  given  to  Moses  (Rom.  4:  2 — 5,  9,)  and 
■which  were  obligatory  on  the  heathen  also  (2:  14 — 20.)  In  short, 
when  we  speak  of  the  ground  or  cause  of  our  salvation,  all  human 
works  and  human  merit  of  any  kind,  must  be  totally  excluded  ;  for 
the  cause  of  this  salvation  is  to  be  sought  entirely  in  the  grace  of 
God,  not  in  what  we  have  done,  but  in  what  he  has  done  for  us. — 
Rom.  3:  27,  where  then  is  boasting  ?  It  is  excluded.  4:  2 — 4. 
Eph.  2:  8,  9,  that  no  man  should  boast. 

The  important  influence  of  the  doctrine,  that  for  salvation  we  are 
not  indebted  to  our  obedience,  is  discussed  in  the  work  on  the  Ob- 
ject of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  381,  668.'  This  doctrine  promotes 
an  impartial  conviction  of  our  depraved  state,  which  is  calculated  to 
urge  us  to  reformation.  It  inspires  us  with  gratitude  and  love  to  j 
God,  with  courage,  zeal,  and  a  willingness  to  advance  still  farther  in 

1  Zacharias'  Biblical  Theol.  §  265.  Pt.  4,  p.  595.  I 


^  73.]  SALVATION  REPRESENTED  AS  A  REWARD.  407 

holiness  ;  inasmuch  as  we  have  the  confident  hope  of  "  so  great 
salvation,"  which  is  not  to  be  purchased  by  our  own  inconsiderable 
moral  worth,  but  is  already  provided  for  us  by  the  grace  of  God. 

IV.  Eph.  2:  5,  7,  it  is  the  gift  of  God.  2  Thess.  2:  16.  Tit.  3: 
7.  Rom.  3:  24,  being  justified  gratuitously  by  his  grace.   11:  6. 

V.  Rom.  3:  24,  being  justified  gratuitously,  by  his  grace,  through 
the  redemption  by  Christ  Jesus. 

VI.  2  Tim.  1:  9.  John  3:  16.  1  John  4;  9,  in  this  was  the  love 
of  God  toward  us  manifested,  because  that  God  sent  his  only  be- 
gotten Son  into  the  world,  that  we  might  live  through  him.  Rom. 
5:  8.  Heb.  2:  9.     §  75. 

VII.  The  fundamental  law  of  the  divine  government,  is,  "  the 
man  that  fulfils  the  law,  shall  find  salvation  by  it."  Gal.  3:  12. — 
And  according  to  this  law,  even  the  most  holy  individual  of  the 
sinful  race  of  man,  could  cherish  no  expectation  of  the  happiness 
enjoyed  by  angels,  whose  obedience  in  the  faith,  is  untarnished  by 
any  criminal  dispositions  or  actions.  The  utmost  which  he  could 
expect,  would  be  some  low  degree  of  happiness,  mingled  with  pun- 
ishment, and  corresponding  to  the  multitude  of  his  sins,  and  the 
magnitude  of  his  imperfections. ^ 

VIII.  Eph.  2:  7,  the  exceeding  riches  of  the  grace  of  God. — 
Just  as  little  as  the  repentance  of  the  prodigal  son,  and  the  con- 
fidence which  he  reposed  in  the  paternal  disposition  of  his  father, 
gave  him  a  right  to  claim  the  displays  of  paternal  favour  which 
were  made  to  him,  just  as  little  as  he  was  by  his  own  personal 
character  strictly  worthy  of  the  reception  given  him  by  his  father  ^ 
so  little  do  our  repentance  and  reformation  give  us  a  right  to  claim 
the  reward  which  is  destined  for  us,  and  which  consists  not  only  in 
an  exemption  from  punishment,  but  also  in  the  enjoyment  of  a  state 
of  glory  in  the  world  to  come.^ 

IX.  If  we  who  have  enjoyed  all  the  means  of  grace,  must  con- 
fess that  we  are  unqualified  for*  the  society  of  the  holy  angels  and  of 
the  Lord  Jesus ;  how  much  more  must  this  be  the  case  with  those 
who  have  not  been  acquainted  with  divine  revelation,  and  who  have 
therefore  been  destitute  of  such  means  !  Their  very  imperfect  re- 
ligion does  not  correspond  to  the  greatness  of  that  salvation  which 
shall  be  bestowed  on  them  also,  on  the  condition,  indeed,  of  their 
obedience,  but  on  account  of  the  pure  grace  of  God  and  Christ,  and 
not  for  the  sake  of  their  imperfect  righteousness.     §  71. 

1  On  the  Object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  672.  3  Ibid.  p.  392. 


'kffl'ii  i: 


<■' 


408  OF    MAN.  [bK.  III. 

SECTION   LXXIV. 

God  is  not  in  any  sense  the  cause  of  the  ruin  of  those  ivho  are  lost.  „ 

That  God,  who  from  eternity  (1  Pet.  1:  20)  appointed  Christ  to 
be  the  Redeemer  of  the  human  family,  undoubtedly  foresaw  the 
fall  and  misery  of  men,  from  which,  in  accordance  with  his  eternal 
decree,  he  wished  to  deliver  them.  He  also  undoubtedly  foresaw 
from  eternity,  what  use  each  individual  would  make  of  the  means 
of  grace  appointed  for  him,  and  which  individuals  would  accept  the 
offered  salvation  on  the  terms  appointed  by  him  (.<§>  67,)  and  which 
of  them  would  reject  it.(l)  But  the  circumstance  that  God  fore- 
sees it,  is  not  the  cause(2)  either  of  the  unfaithfulness  or  the  misery 
which  he  foresees.  But  he  foresees  it  because  it  will  actually  take 
place,  though  it  is  contrary  to  his  will,  that  it  should  {§61  ;)  and 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other  takes  place  because  God  foresaw  it. 
Moreover,  the  object  for  which  the  law  by  which  the  disobedient 
are  excluded  from  heaven  was  enacted,  was  not  that  those  individ- 
uals might  be  excluded  from  future  happiness,  but  that  they  might 
attain  salvation  on  the  condition  prescribed  by  that  law.(3)  It  is 
through  their  own  fault,  that  they  are  lost,  and  not  in  consequence 
of  any  decree  of  God. (4)  They  will  not  be  condemned  because 
God  decreed  that  they  should  not  be  saved  on  any  condition  ;  but 
because  they,  through  their  own  fault,  did  not  perform  that  condi- 
tion on  which  God  resolved  to  save  them. 

Illustrations. 

I.     Foreknowledge  and  predestination. — Although  God  has  not 
excluded  any  nation  from  the  knowledge  of  Christianity,  but  in- 
tended the  christian  doctrines  for  all  without   exception  (<§>  70 ;) 
they  have,  nevertheless,  for  wise  purposes  inscrutable  to  us,  hither- 
to remained  unknown  to  a   portion  of  the  human  family.     These 
reasons,  however,  were  known  to  God  from  eternity.     Hence,  God 
knew,  from   eternity,  which  individuals  would  become  acquainted 
with  Christianity,  and  would  embrace  the   Gospel,  and  also  what  j 
particular  persons  would  become  acquainted   with  the  doctrines  of  I 
Christianity  in  consequence  of  their  descent  from  christian  parents,  j 
Of  these,  therefore,  it  is  justly  said,  that  God,  from  eternity,  select-  | 


^  74.]  GOD  WILLING  TO.  SAVE  ALL.  409 


ed  them  for  citizens  of  his  kingdom,  or  for  his  people.  Eph.  1:  4, 
according  as  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him,  before  the  foundation  of  the* 
^world,  that  we  should  be  holy  and  without  blame  before  him  in  love. 
Col.  1;  22,  to  present  you  holy  and  unblamable  and  unreprovable 
in  his  sight.  Thus  also,  the  Jewish  people,  in  distinction  from  pa- 
gan nations,  was  called  "  a  holy  people,  an  unreprovable  seed." 
Book  of  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  10:  15,  Xoi6goGiog^amg[.ia  afu/nn- 
xov.  \1:%  t&vog  (xyiov.  10:17.  18:1,  5,  9,  oatoi.  10:20.  18: 
7,  20,  ^Vxa^o*  just.^  But  the  church  of  Christ  shall  appear  before 
her  Lord,  "  holy  and  unblemished"  in  a  much  higher  sense,  than 
this  in  which  it  is  applied  to  the  Jewish  people.^ 

Thus,  in  the  above  sense,  it  may  be  said  that  God  had  long  ago, 
even  from   eternity,  aV  a^;^???,^  elected   those  persons,   that  they         ^^ 
fshould  obtain    salvation    through   faith    in    the   Gospel,  iv  niatu         'X 
akridiiag^  i.  e.  tou  evuyytViov ;  and  that  he  had  called  them  by  vir-        ^"* 
tue  of  his  eternal  purpose  through  the  Gospel,  or  actually  received     .  ,* 
them  among  his   people.     Eph.  1:  4,  11.  2  Tim.  1:  9.     Rom.  8:    '  '^' 
;28.     And  certainly  it   is  not  an   unimportant  thought,  that  we  are 
I  Christians  according  to  the  eternal  purpose  and  plan  of  God.     It  is    ,      ^ 
not  by  accident,  but  in  consequence  of  the  eternal  plan  of  God,  that  *  ♦*%! 
we  are  Christians,  akrjTol  called  ;  in  other  words,  the  offer  of  salva-       ;  * 
tion,  made  in  the  Gospel,  is  not  brought  to  us  by  accident,  so  as  to'     ♦• 
leave  us  in  doubt  whether  it  is  specifically  intended  for  us,  but  in 
consequence  of  the  divine  purpose  formed  in  eternity.     Long  be- 
fore the  invitations  of  the  Gospel  were  given  to  us,  God  foresaw         ^ 
that  precisely  we  would  become  Christians  or  members  of  his  peo-         ^ 
p'e.     Rom.  8:  29,  ngoiyvM   so.  iake'ATOvg.  v.  28,  ngoeyvia  ixXfxTovg. 
Christians  are,  according  to  the  predestination  of  God,  chosen  frona 
the  mass  of  mankind  (ixAfxro/,  comp.  John  15:  19)  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  has  dedicated   them  to  God  by  his   instructions  in  the 
Gospel,  and  by  the  gracious   influences  connected  with  it;  in  order 
that  they  might  manifest  their  obedience  to  God,  and  consequently 
be   sprinkled   with  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  with  the  blood   of 
Jesus  Christ.'*     And  for  those,  concerning  whom  he   foresaw  that 
they  would  belong  to  his  people,  he  appointed  a  glory  like  unto  his 
Son's  glory  (Rom.  8:  29,    ngoojgiae   ovfifAogqovg  ttjg  eiaopog  tov 
viov  uviovj)  and  a  participation  in  the  happiness  of  his  Son  (v.  17  ;) 
in  short,  them  he  has  actually  predestined  to  that  salvation  to  which  J 

the  invitation  is  given  in  the  Gospel.     2  Thess.  2:  13,  14.    Comp,-        *  '^ 
§  64.     To  those  concerning  whom  he  foresaw  that  they  would  be- 


•  ■ 


1  Comp.  §  99.111.  6.  2  Dissert,  in  Epist.  Coloss.  Note  42. 

3  The  expression  an  aoyjtfi  in  general  signifies/ormcrZy.     I  John  2:  7,  24.  Ps. 
74:  2.  LXX.  Heb.  c'5i:>79— ilso/rom  ettrnitij.  1  John  1:  1.  2:  13.  Is.  43:  13. 

4  On  the  Object  oV  the  death  of  Ciirist,  p.  606,  note. 

62 


410  OF  MAN.  [bK.  hi, 

long  to  his  people,  he  gave,  in  accordance  with  his  gracious  and 
benevolent  purpose  [tv  ayanri^  Eph.  1:  4,)  the  right  to  become 
children  of  God  (v.  5,)  and  consequently  possessors  of  the  blessed- 
ness of  Clmst  [GvyaXriQoi/ofioi  XgtOTov  Rom.  8:  17,)  to  the  glory 
of  his  grace  {ilg  h'natvov  ir}g  do'§rig  r^g  ^dgiTog  aviov  Eph.  1:  6.) 
As  to  the  others,  concerning  whom  God  foresaw  that  they  would 
not  be  among  the  xXrjTovg,  the  called  or  his  people,  the  apostle 
here  says  nothing,  either  affirmatively  or  negatively  ;  but  merely 
assures  us  that  those  who  are  called,  are  called  in  accordance  with 
the  saving  purpose  of  God  which  had  been  long  since  formed.  But 
God  follows  up  the  plans  which  he  devised.  Eph.  1:  U.  Accord- 
*"g'y>  j^st  as  he  has  been  faithful  to  his  purpose  and  has,  in  accor- 
dance with  it,  given  us  the  "  call"  to  become  Christians  (Rom.  8: 
30,)  so  also  will  he  prosecute  his  plan  still  further,  and  leave  noth- 
ing undone,  on  his  part,  to  accomplish  that  salvation  which  he  has 
appointed  for  us  (Rom.  8:  29.  2  Thess.  2:  13,)  and  to  the  accep- 
tance of  which  he  has  invited  as  by  the  call  to  Christianity.  Now, 
as  this  salvation  is  offered  on  condition  of  faith  in  the  Gospel,  God 
does  every  thing  on  his  part,  not  only  to  excite  (Rom.  8:  30)  this 
faith,  which  is  the  condition  of  our  justification  (dty.al&yoig  Rom.  3: 
26,  28,  31,)  but  also  to  preserve  and  increase  it  (1  Pet.  1:5.  2 
Thess.  2:  16  ;)  in  order  that  he  may  be  able  actually  to  bestow  this 
salvation  on  us,  in  the  way  which  he  has  appointed  (Rom.  8:  30.) 
In  order  that  he  may  accom.plis.h  his  beneficent  plan,  evdoKiav 
«V«t>waJi/>;?,  God,  on  his  part,  takes  such  measures  as  are  calculated 
to  promote  that  faith  in  us,  which  is  requisite  to  its  accomplishment, 
and  cooperates  with  thus,  to  make  us  worthy  of  our  calling,  dhovv 
lijg  xXrioiojg  2  Thess.  1:  11.  3:  3.  Phil.  1:  6.  Nor  have  we  any 
reason  to  fear,  that  God  would  be  prevented  from  promoting,  in  an 
efficient  manner,  these  purposes  of  his  grace  by  any  incidental  ex- 
ternal circumstances,  or  that  his  cooperating  agency  could  be  render- 
ed impossible  by  any  prior  plan  or  arrangement  of  the  world.  For 
God,  whose  omnipotence  is  engaged  in  the  accomplishment  of  our 
salvation,  is  superior  to  every  obstacle  which  could  present  itself. — 
"  And  what  is  the  exceeding  greatness  of  his  power  toward  us  wha 
believe^ — according  to  the  power  that  worketh  in  us'*^ — who  work- 
eth  all  things  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.'"*  And  certainly 
his  plan  for  our  salvation  is  not  of  recent  origin,  was  not  formed  later 

1  Koppe,  in  his  Nov.  Test.  p.  272,  places  the  words  iv  ayaTcrjy  not  at  the  end 
of  the  4Ui  verse,  buf^t  the  beginning  of  the  5th,  and  thus  joins  them  to  it^oo^- 
iaai'^ftas.  It  accords  better  with  the  context  to  join  these  words  to  d'ios.aa 
they  relate  to  the  blessings  bestowed  by  God  on  Christians;  whereas  ayaTT^' 
would  have  to  mean  christian  love,  if  the  words  are  conceded  with  the  preceding.! 
-verse. 

3  Eph.  1: 19.         3  Eph.  3: 20.  4  Eph.  1:  11.  Rom.  8:  31.  John  10:  2&.      | 


^  74.]  GOD  WILLING  TO  SAVE  ALL.  411 


;fean  his  other  purposes.^  On  the  contrary,  he  has,  from  eternity, 
K>  ordered,  guided,  and  permitted  every  thing,  that  nothing  can 
3revent  the  salvation  appointed  for  us  (Rom.  8:  17,  35  ;)  and  every 
thing  that  occurs,  even  the  afflictions  of  life  shall  work  together  for 
3ur  good  (avfegysTv  tig  aya&ov  so.  So^ccp  v.  28,  30.)  Such  is  the 
aature  of  this  plan,  that  nothing  can  prevent  its  accomplishment, 
jnless,  notwithstanding  the  most  efficient  aid  of  God,  we  are  our- 
selves negligent,  and  resist  the  influences  of  the  divine  Spirit, 
3xerted  for  the  sanctification  of  our  hearts  [dytaofAM  nv^vfAaiog  2 
rhess.  2;  13,)  and  will  not  suffer  ourselves  to  be  brought  to  believe 
n  the  Gospel  and  to  obey  its  injunctions  (^vTiaxoi^p  1  Pet.  1:  2,)  if 
ive  do  not  receive  the  invitation  to  salvation  with  a  becoming  seri- 
ousness,^ if  we  do  not  make  a  conscientious  use  of  the  blessings  and 
means  of  grace  given  us,  if,  though  according  to  the  decree  of  God, 
we  belong  to  those  who  are  called,  we  do  not  love  him  or  are  not 
willing  to  persevere  in  the  love  of  him,  who  in  his  gracious  plan 
called  us  to  so  glorious  a  salvation. 

But  the  Scriptures  do  not  encourage  the  inquisitive  and  timorous 
inquiry,^  whether  we  are  among  the  number  of  those  of  the  called 
who  will  persevere  in  the  faith  unto  the  end  of  their  lives.  For 
Qothing  is  more  certain  than,  that  those  only  of  the  professors  of 
Christianity,  whose  character  at  the  end  of  their  lives  is  such  as  the 
Gospel  requires,  will  actually  receive  the  salvation  offered  to  them : 
and  it  is  equally  certain  that  God,  from  eternity,  foreknew  distinct- 
ly what  would  be  the  character  of  each.  We  also  shall  know, 
when  the  event  arrives,  what  God  foresaw  concerning  us ;  and  un- 
til then  it  is  enough  for  us  to  know,  and  of  this  we  may  be  fully 
convinced,  that  it  is  the  most  sincere  and  earnest  will  of  God,  actu- 
ally to  bestow  the  offered  salvation  on  all  those  who  are  called  ;  and 
on  the  other  hand,  that  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  use  our  utmost,  and 
untiring  exertions'*  to  accomplish  this  earnest  will  of  God,  in  the  at- 
tainment of  which  he  himself  cooperates  in  the  niost  active  manner 
(2  Pet.  1:  3;)  and  that  our  exertions  must  be  continued  even  after 
we  belong  to  those  of  the  called  who  have  reformed  (iaXsaiovg 
Matt.  22:  15.,^)  and  after  we  have  attained  a  distinguished  grade 
among  the   pious  {ixXexzoi  in  the  more  specific  sense,^)  and   have 


1  Eph.  1:  4.  2  Tim.  1:  9.  2Thess.  2:  13. 

«  Acts  13:  46.  2  Pet.  1:  10,  "  to  obtain  find  to   retain  the  rights  and  privileges 
I  of  the  people  of  God,  i.  e.  those  obtained  by  justification." 

3  Luke  13:23.  comp.Weismann's  Schadiasm.  Academ.  p.  521. 

4  Luke  13:  24,  strive  to  enter  through  the  strait  gate.     1  Tim.  6: 12,  fight  the 
good  fight  of  faith.     Compare  V.  17-19.  2  Pet.  1:5-10.  Phil.  3: 12-14. 

5  The  ixhxTol  (v.  14)  are  the  dyad-oi  of  (v.  10)  those  who  accepted  the  inviU* 
tion.     See  Weismann's  Institut.  Theol.  exeget.  Dogra.p.676. 

C  Matt.  20:  16,  the  ixXfxroi—ihe  nQOjtoi. 


i 


412  OF  MAN.  [bK. 

made  much  progress  in  the  path  of  holiness.  If  we  have  not  this 
conviction,  we  shall  be  in  danger  of  being  discouraged,  or  of  falling 
into  doubts  as  to  our  salvation,  or  of  being  indolent  or  indifferent, 
and  thus,  perhaps,  not  perform  the  condition  on  which  our  salvation 
is  suspended.  If  we  do  submit  to  the  condition  on  which  alone 
God  is  willing  to  save  us,  and  persevere  unto  the  end,  it  will  appear 
that  God  foresaw  that  we  should  continue  in  the  faith  and  attain  the 
promised  salvation.^  But  the  reason  why  we  fulfil  or  neglect  to 
fulfil  the  condition  appointed  by  God,  is  not  because  God  foresaw 
that  we  would  do  so. 

II.  Those  passages  of  Scripture  which  appear  to  represent  God 
as  the  author  of  evil,  may  in  accordance  with  the  usage  of  language, 
be  explained  as  meaning  merely  that  he  did  not  hinder  it,  that  he 
permitted  it.  See  <^  39.  III.  4.  and  the  Observv.  p.  25  etc.  In 
Dissert.  II.  in  epist.  ad  Coloss.  et  Philem.  Note  165,  it  is  remark- 
ed, that  the  words  (Rom.  9;  15 — 18,)  are  doubtless  the  words  of 
some  Pharisaic  opponent  whom  the  apostle  is  addressing  v.  19,  and 
that  the  whole  passage  contains  nothing  more  than  the  declaration 
that  God  abandons  the  perverse  sinner  to  his  perverseness  and  the 
consequences  resulting  from  it. 

III.  That  the  law  which  prescribes  the  condition  of  salvation  is  a 
just  one,  has  been  proved  in  «^  67,  in  connexion  with  «§>  24. 

IV.  Let  the  reader  consult  Baumgarten  Crusius^  Plan  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  p.  39.  In  <^  39.  III.  4,  it  is  shown  why  God, 
notwithstanding  his  love  to  us,  still  permits  the  unfaithfulness  of 
men. 

1  In  the  language  of  systematic  divinity,  Praedestinatio  stride  sumta  (Sartorii 
Gompend.  p.  195.) 


BOOK    IV. 

OF  JESUS  CHRIST  THE  REDEEMER  OF  THE  HU- 
MAN FAMILY. 


PART    I. 

OF  THE  PERSON  AND  DIFFERENT  STATES  OF  THE  REDEEMER. 


SECTION  LXXV. 


Jesus  is  really  and  truly  man,  but  was  conceived  in  a  miraculous 

manner. 

The  Scriptures  teach  us,  that  the  Saviour,(l)  through  whose 
instrumentality  God(2)  determined  to  redeem  us  (*§>  65,)  is  really 
and  truly  man,(3)  born  of  a  ivoman,{4)  and  in  so  far  was  a  descen- 
dant of  the  ancestors(5)  of  Mary. (6)  But,  in  order  that  he  might 
be  free  from  all  depravity,  he  was  conceived,  not  by  a  human  fath- 
I  er,(7)  but  by  the  power  of  God  exerted  in  Mary,  his  mother  ;(8) 
and,  even  on  this  account,  he  is  the  Son  of  God(9)  and  not  the  son 
of  an  earthly  father. 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  idea  conveyed  by  the  term  Redeemer  or  Saviour  [awr^p/] 
or  salvation  [amti^Qtov  Luke  2:  30.  Salus,  per  meton.  for  Auctor 
salutis,]  is  the  same  which  is  expressed  by  the  name  Jesus;  and 
this  name  was  given  him  by  divine  authority.  Luke  1:  31,  thou 
shalt  call  his  name  Jesus,  2:  2L  comp.  v.  11,  ffwriip.  Matt.  1:  21. 

1  2  Tim.  1:  10.  Tit.  1:  4.  2:  13.  3:  6.  In  these  passages  Christ  is  called 
orwnyp  i^fiov.  1  John  4:  14,  aum^  rov  it6a/M>v  2  Pet.  1:  11,3,  18,  o(onj^,  without 
I  any  addition. 


414  OF  THE  REDEEMEB.  [bK.  IV. 

II.  God  our  Redeemer. — The  whole  work  of  our  redemption  is 
attributed  to  God  as  its  ultimate  Author,  and  God  is  called  our  Sa- 
viour [omvriQ  ;^]  because  he  produced  the  man  Jesus  by  immediate 
creation,  and  placed  him  in  an  entirely  peculiar  union  with  the  God- 
head ;  because  God  sent  his  Son ;  because  Christ  did  and  still  does 
every  thing  according  to  the  will  of  God  ;  and  because  he  was  given 
us  by  God  to  be  the  Author  of  our  salvation.^ 

That  God  did  thus  produce  the  man  Jesus  is  evident  from  Heb. 
2:  10,  11,  He  that  reconciled  and  they  that  were  reconciled  are 
both  descended  from  one,  i'i  ivog  navTig.  God  is  their  common  au- 
thor and  Father.  In  reference  to  the  phrase  "  Deus  creavit  homi- 
nem  Jesum"  *'  God  created  the  man  Jesus,"  Morus  makes  the  fol- 
lowing remark  -?  "  God  created  him,  for  he  was  unwilling  that  he 
should  be  born  by  procreation  according  to  the  ordinary  course  of 
nature.  It  may  also  be  said  that  the  omnipotence  of  God  brought 
it  about,  that  this  man  was  born  of  a  woman.  But  here  we  ought 
to  stop.  For  who  will  venture  to  explain  the  mode,  when  any 
thing  is  said  to  be  accomplished  by  divine  power  ?" 

That  God  sent  his  Son,  and  that  Jesus  did  every  thing  according 
to  the  will  of  God,  is  taught  in  the  following  passages  :  Rom.  8:  3, 
for  what  the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weakened  through  the 
flesh,  God,  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and 
for  sin)  (i.  e.  an  ofiering  for  sin)  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  (i.  e. 
punished  it  in  Christ's  body  and  thus  destroyed  it  in  ours.)  5:  5 — ■ 
8,  God  hath  commended  (proved,  displayed)  his  love  to  us,  in  that 
while  we  were  yet  sinners  Christ  died  for  us.  1  John  4:  9 — 
11.  John  3:  16,  God  gave  his  only  begotten  Son.  4:  34.  6:  38 
— 40,  I  came  down  from  heaven  not  to  do  my  own  will,  but  the 
will  of  him  that  sent  me.  8:  29,  the  Father  hath  not  left  me  alone, 
for  I  always  do  those  things  that  please  him.  10:  17  etc.  14:  31. 
Isaiah  53:  10,  nb^?  "in^a  nin";  Y'?.^  the  pleasure  of  Jehovah  shall 
prosper  in  his  hands.  Heb.  2:  9,  10,  by  the  grace  of  God. 

III.  John  5:  27.  The  son  of  man.  Compare  «§.  65.  III.  7.  John 
8:  40,  av&Qwnov  man.  1  Tim.  2:  5,  av&goinog  Xgioiog  '/rjaovg, 
the  man  Christ  Jesus.     Rom.  5:  15,  19.   1  Cor.  15:  21. 

IV.  Luke  1:  31,  i^^fj  vtov  thou  shalt  bring  forth  a  son.  2:  5  etc. 
(the  whole  history  of  the  birth  of  Jesus.)  Gal.  4:  4,  yevofAevog  in 
yifi/a*xo?,  born  of  a  woman. 

1  1  Tim.  2:  3.  4:  10.  Tit.  1:  3.  2: 10.  3:  4. 

2  Luke  2:  30,  TO  aojtij^tov  gov  *<  the  salvation  bestowed  on  thee  (by  God.") 
Psalra  119:  123,  166,  174,  ^riSSWi     "  the  deliverer  bestowed  on  us  by  thee." 

3  "  Creavit,  noluit  enim  Deus,  procreando  eum  exoriri,  ut  vulgo  soboles  nasci 
eolet.  Potest  enim  dici  omnipotentia  Dei  etFecit,  ut  hie  homo  e  mulicre  nascere- 
tur.  Hie  subsistere  debemus.  Quis  recte  audet  modum  deecribere,  ubi  vi  di- 
vJna  aliquid  efFectum  esse  dicilur.     Epit.  Theol.  Pt.  IV.  cap.  II.  §  3.  Note  2. 


<§>  75.]  GENEALOGY  OF  CHRIST.  415 

V.  Christ  was  the  descendant  of  Mary's  ancestors.  Born  of  the 
seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh — from  whom  (the  fathers) 
Christ  is  descended  according  to  the  flesh,  who  is  God  over  all  bles- 
sed forever. — From  the  fruit  of  his  loins  (David's) — And  the  Lord 
shall  give  unto  him  the  throne  of  his  father  David — To  thy  (Abra- 
ham's) seed  which  is  Christ — the  son  of  David,  the  son  of  Abraham. 
Rom.  1:  3— 9:5.— Acts  13:23.  2:  30.— Luke  1:32.— Gal.  3:  16. 
—Matt.  1:1.  In  the  Diss.  I.  in  lib.  N.  T.  hist.  Not.  1,  the  sense 
of  the  title  which  Matthew  (1:  1)  prefixes  to  his  genealogy  (2 — 16) 
is  expressed  thus:  "  The  genealogy  of  Jesus,  whom  I  believe  to 
be  the  Messiah  (^Y^^orroi^,)  and  therefore  a  descendant  of  David 
and  Abraham  (as  the  Messiah  is  to  be.")  Matt.  22:  42.  Acts  2: 
30.  3:  25. 

VL  Luke  3:  31,  34,  zoo  Au^id  tov  '^^gaa^i  of  David,  of  A- 
braham,  to  which  vlog  or  son  (in  its  widest  sense  descendant)  must 
be  supplied  from  the  23d  verse.  The  genealogy  of  Luke  (3:  23) 
is  the  genealogy  of  Mary  ;  and  the  words  v.  23,  'JrfGovg  (up  coV 
ivof4tCeTo  vlog  'jMGrjq,  agreeably  to  the  meaning  of  the  Evangelist 
signify  :  "  he  was  the  descendant  (not  of  Joseph,  which  was  a  mere 
conjecture,  but  of  Mary  who  subsequently  was  his  wife,  and  there- 
fore also  of  her  father,  i.  e.)  of  Heli."  The  historian,  in  this  extra- 
ordinary case,  simply  says  (og  pofiiCeio  as  was  supposed  ;  because  it 
was  something  uncommon  to  derive  the  genealogy  from  the  mother's 
side. 

VII.  Supernatural  conception  of  Jesus. — In  the  work  on  the 
Object  of  the  Gospel  of  John,^  it  is  remarked  that  the  genealogy  in 
Matt.  1:1,  was  probably  derived  from  some  unbelieving  relative  of 
Jesus  ;  for  Matthew  himself  would  not  have  expressed  himself  in 
the  language  used  in  v.  16:  6  Xeyo^iepog  Xgtaiog, '' who  is  called 
Christ."  But  even  this  unbelieving  writer  of  the  genealogy  does 
not  dispute  the  supernatural  conception  of  Jesus,  or  even  pretend  to 
be  ignorant  of  it ;  which  might  have  been  expected  if  it  had  been 
written  by  a  later  unbeliever,  after  certain  sayings  had  gone  abroad. 
But  (v.  16)  he  merely  adduces  an  indirect  relation  between  Jesus 
and  Joseph. 

Another  evidence  that  the  writer  of  this  genealogy  did  not  regard 
Jesus  as  a  mere  man,  may  be  derived  from  the  structure  of  the 
genealogy   itself.     The    evidence  is   this :    The   whole  genealogy 

1  p.  236.  [In  this  passage  of  the  work  here  referred  to,  the  author  states  that 
this  genealogical  table  was  probably  the  family  register  kept  in  the  family  of 
Jesus  ;  that  Matthew,  who  belonged  to  that  family  himself,  had  there  obtained 
it  and  inserted  it  in  his  Gospel;  that  the  phrase  "  who  is  called  Christ,"  suits 
only  the  time  prior  to  his  resurrection,  and  that  probably  one  of  the  unbelieving 
brethren  or  relatives  of  Jesus  (John  7:  5.)  brought  down  this  family  register  till 
the  time  of  Jesus.  S.] 


t 


416  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.    IV. 

is  divided  into  three  parts,  each  embracing  fourteen  generations. 
David  is  the  last  member  of  the  first  succession,  and  also  the  first 
of  the  second.  In  like  manner  Josiah  (v.  10.  11,)  agreeably 
to  this  calculation,  must  be  the  last  member  of  the  second  series, 
and  the  first  of  the  third.  Thus  Joseph  is  the  14th  member 
of  the  third  series,  and  consequently  Jesus,  the  adopted  son  of  Jo- 
seph, is  excluded  from  the  series  of  generations. 

The  query  urged  in  Schmidt's  Bibliothek  fur  Kritik  und  Exe- 
gese,^  "  What  is  the  use  of  the  genealogy  of  Matthew,  which  is  to 
prove  that  Jesus  is  descended  from  the  family  of  David,  if  Joseph, 
whose  genealogical  register  is  carried  back  until  to  David,  was  not 
his  real  father  ?"  is  answered  by  the  remarks  in  the  seventh  Illus- 
tration, as  well  as  by  the  following  observation  :^  "  this  genealogy, 
which  as  a  family  document  Matthew  prefixed  to  his  Gospel,  was 
also  useful  to  prove  that,  even  according  to  that  hypothesis  of  the 
Jews,  which  he  afterwards  (v.  16,  18  etc.)  proves  to  be  false,  Je- 
sus would  still  be  a  descendant  of  David,  because  Joseph  himself 
was  also  of  that  family." 

The  objections  to  the  genuineness  of  the  first  two  chapters  of  Mat- 
thew, which  have  been  urged  principally  by  Stroth,^  are  answered 
in  the  Dissert.  II.  in  libros  N.  T.  historicos.'*  Other  writings  and 
dissertations  for  and  against  the  genuineness  of  these  two  chapters, 
may  be  seen  in  Hanlein's  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.^  To  these  are 
to  be  added  the  following  later  works,  in  which  the  genuineness  of 
this  portion  of  Holy  Writ  is  vindicated  :  Griesbach's  Epimetron  ad 
Comraentarium  criticum  in  Graecum  Matthaei  textum,  Jena,  1801  ; 
Hug's  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament;^  and  Siiskind,  Symbo- 
larum  ad  illustranda  quaedam  evangeliorum  loca."^  The  following 
are  the  principal  arguments  for  the  genuinenessof  these  chapters. — 
1.  The  manuscripts  are  all  in  their  favour,  with  the  exception  of 
only  a  few. — 2.  The  earliest  fathers  of  the  church  were  acquainted 
with  them.  They  were  evidently  the  ground  work  of  the  similar 
but  more  circumstantial  narratives  of  the  earliest  history  of  Jesus, 
which  were  found  in  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews,  and  were  transfer- 
red out  of  it  into  the  Gospel  which  Justin  used.®  It  is  evident  that 
Celsus  (to  whose  silence  Siroth  appeals)  was  acquainted  with  them, 
and  specifically  with  the  genealogy  contained  in  the  first  chapter  f 

1  Vol.  1,  p.  199,  403.  2  Ueber  den  Zweck  Johannis.  p.  237. 

3  Interpolations  of  Matt,  in  Eichhorn's  Repert.  fOr  bibl.  and  Morgent,  Lit- 
teratur,  Th.  IX.  S.  144. 

4  p.  11 — 14.  comp.  Ueber  den  Zweck  Johannis,  S.  271.  Anmerk.* 

5  Vol.II.Pt.  II.  p.  334  etc. 

6  Vol.  I.  p.  179—195.        7  Pars  I,  1802,  p.  3—9. 

8  On  the  Object  of  John's  Gospel,  p.  272.  Hug,  sup.  cit.  p.  190 — 194. 

9  Dissert.  II.  in  lib.  N.  T.  hist.  p.  13.  SOskind  Dissert. 


<§>  "76.]  GENEALOGY  OF  CHRIST.  417 

for  he  speaks  of  historians  who  trace  the  genealogy  of  Jesus  from 
the  first  father  of  the  human  family  and  from  Jewish  kings  (yeveako- 
^tjGuvjeg  dno  lov  ngojrov  qvvtognal  imp  iv  'Jovduiotg  ^aaiXicop  lov 

Ji^oovp})  By  the  former  must  be  meant  Luke,  by  the  latter 
Matthew.  That  Celsus  should  pass  over  unnoticed,  the  apparent 
contradiction  of  the  genealogies  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  is  no  more 
remarkable  than  that  he  should  omit  to  mention  many  other  things. 
— If  Tatian,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Theodoret  in  his  Mono- 
tessaron,  omitted  the  genealogy  of  Matthew,  it  is  certain  that  he 
also  omitted  that  of  Luke,  and  acted  as  a  known  heretic  on  doctrin- 
al (systematic)  grounds.^ — 3.  The  words  Matt.  4:  13,  'Jrjoovg  xa- 
jukcnojp  xi^v  AuCa^tT  Jesus  leaving  Nazareth,  presuppose  what  is 
said  in  ch.  2:  23,  he  resided  at  Nazareth.  The  apparent  inconsis- 
tency between  Matt.  2,  and  Luke  2:  39,  compared  with  v.  22,  is 
reconciled  by  Hug  (sup.  cit.) — 4.  The  reason  why  neither  Mark 
nor  Luke  inserted  any  thing  into  their  Gospels  from  the  first  two 
chapters  of  Matthew  is,  because  they  made  no  such  extracts  from 
any  part  of  Matthew. — 5.  In  the  I  and  II  chapters  of  Matthew,  we 
find  quotations  made  from  the  O.  Test,  in  the  same  manner  as  in 
the  other  parts  of  Matthew.  Moreover,  the  want  of  a  genealogy 
in  Matthew's  Gospel,  which  was  written  for  Jewish  Christians  of 
Palestine,  would  be  a  deficiency  in  the  work.  On  the  conjecture, 
that  Marcion's  Gospel  of  Luke,  in  which  the  genealogy  of  Jesus 
and  the  account  of  his  birth  are  wanting,  is  more  probably  the  genu- 
ine one  than  our  own,  see  what  has  been  said  <§>  2.  111.  8,  where  are 
adduced  the  proofs  that  Marcion  adulterated  the  genuine  Gospel  of 
Luke. 

VIII.  Luke  1:  34 — 37,  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee, 
Matt.  1:  18 — 20,  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.— It  is  stated  in  the  Tiib.  gel.  Anzeig.  (for  1801  p.  260,) 
that  the  expressions,  power  of  the  highest,  the  Holy  Spirit,  dvvafiig 
vx^uGiov,  Tivsvfia  ayiov  {ix  nvev^ajog  a//oi;  Matt.  1:20,)  always 
signify  divine  causation. 

IX.  Luke  1:35,  Therefore  also,  that  holy  one  who  shall  be 
born  of  thee,  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God. 


SECTION    LXXVI. 


The  dose  union  oj  the  man  Jesus  iviih  the  Godhead. 
Another  reason  why  the  name  "  Son  of  God"(l)  is  given  to  the 


1  S  1.  111.  3.  2  Diss.  II.  p.  12.     Hug,  p.  194. 

53 


418  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IV. 

nian  Jesus,  is,  because,  according  to  the  will  of  the  Father,  he  is 
partaker  of  his  divine  perfections  ;(2)  inasmuch  as  the  well  beloved 
Son  of  the  Father  (John  1:  18,  2,)  who  in  consequence  of  his  very 
close  union  with  him,  is  himself  God  and  the  Creator  and  Preser- 
ver of  the  universe,(3)  has  united  himself  to  the  man  Jesus  in  a 
union  so  close. (4)  that  no  other  union  like  it  is  found  between  God 
and  any  other  man,  and  indeed  any  other  creature.  Hence  Jesus 
is  also  called  the  "  only  (6)  Son  of  Gk>d,"(7)  the  most  perfect  im- 
age of  God, (8)  to  whom  in  reference  to  his  close  union  with  God, 
BO  person  can  be  compared* 

iLLUSTRATIOKS. 

I.  Several  names  of  Christ. — In  John  1:  14,  Christ  is  called 
fiovoyivrjg  only  begotten,  because  he,  this  man  [au(j'6y]  was  also,:  al 
the  same  time,  the  Xojfog  Wordy  who  was  in  the  beginning  with  God 
and  who  was  God  (v.  1 — 3.)  Compare  111.  5.  infra.  In  like 
manner  this  man  who  shed  his  blood  upon  the  cross,  is  called  in 
Col.  1:  13,  0  viog  Trjg  o.'^anrig  lav  dtov  the  Son  of  his  love  v.  1% 
iixoji>  lou  xfeov  Tov  dogdiov  the  image  of  the  invisible  God,,  inas- 
much as  he  possesses  excellences  in  preference  to  all  creatures 
^ngbnoTOxog  ndaijg  y.ilaemg  v.  15]  which  are  grounded  in  this,  that 
he  can  be  regarded  as  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  things  (v.  16. 
comp.  John  1:  3.)  In  Heb.  1:  2,  also,  this  divine  Messenger  to 
men  is  called  vlog  Son  because  he  can  at  the  same  time  be  regarded 
as  the  Creator  and  the  Preserver  of  the  world  (v.  2,  3,  10 — 12;) 
and  is,  by  virtue  of  this  divine  perfection  (v.  3,)  capable  of  a  digni- 
ty which  raises  him  above  all  things,  even  above  the  angels  tliem- 
selves.^ 

II.  Divine  perfections  of  Jesus. — Col.  1:  19,  iv  auiM  fudonn^s^ 
Tiuv  TO  nh'iQMfiu  xatorAiiaai.  It  pleased  the  Father  that  in  him 
should  all  the  fulness  dwell  (i.  e.  the  fulness  of  the  divinity — what- 
ever power  or  excellence  there  is  in  the  Father.) — eidoxnae  sc.  d 
naitjg,  v.  12  (to  which  the  verb  may  be  referred  notwithstanding 
its  distance,  as  the  intermediate  verses  14 — 18  are  to  be  regarded 
as  a  parenthesis)  77 A>;pw/M«  namely  uvtov — nA/i^oj^a  Ttjg  Oeotijiog^ 
(2:  9)  divinitalis  summa — quicquid  virtutis  et  excellentlae  est  in  Pa- 
tre.^  John  5:  26,  edtone  (6  nuii^g)  im  vho  ^wt]v  tyfiv  iv  tuvKo. 
*'  The  Father  gave  to  the  Son,  to  have  the  divine  life  and  divine 
power  and  happiness  in  himself"     In  the  work  On  the  Design  of 

1  Diss.  I.  in  Ep.  ad  Col.  note  1^,  24.  Comment,  an  the  Hebrews,  p.  4 — 8. 
»  Diss.  I.  CoL  not.  3&. 


^  77.]  UNITY  OF  CHRIST  WITH  GOD.  419 


the  Gospel  of  John  (p.  192,)  it  is  remarked,  that  these  words  refer 
to  the  union  of  the  man  Jesus  with  the  divine  nature,  because  the 
same  person  is  spoken  of,  who  in  v.  27  is  called  vlog  av^goinou 
Son  oi  man. 

The  explanation  of  this  passage  in  the  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis 
jiA»Jpft>/ua,^  affords  a  reply  to  the  objection  urged  by  Schleusner 
(Lex.  art.  nXfigcjfiu  no.  7)  against  the  translation,  "  every  divine 
perfection."  If  the  divine  nature  of  Christ  were  spoken  of,  it  could 
not  well  be  said:  *'  Grod  willed  that  every  divine  perfection  should 
be  in  Christ."  For  according  to  that  explanation  evd6xt]a6  expres- 
ses the  free  purpose  of  God  to  bestow  all  the  divine  perfections  on 
the  man  Jesus  (iv  aJrw^)  by  virtue  of  his  special  union  with  the 
godhead.^  The  reason  that  God  willed  this  is  stated  in  the  20th 
vfirse. 

III.  John  1:  3.  Col.  1:  16.  Heb.  1:  2,  3,  Comp.  <§>  42. 

IV.  John  1:  14,  o  koyog  golqI  tyeviiQ  the  word  became  flesh. 

V.  That  man  [a«pS]  who  dwelt  with  the  apostles  [la^ypcDaev  Iv 
»J/M?i/ John  1:  14,]  and  personally  taught  them  concerning  God,  is 
called  "  the  only  Son  of  the  Father  y^Aovoyevriq  nugcc  TiaxQog, 
fiotfoysvi^g  vlog"]  because  the  koyogy  {>i6g  [God,  the  Word  v.  1 .] 
had  become  man,  because  he  who  had  been  with  the  Father  [eig 
jov  xolnov  Tov  Tiatgog^^  and  who  himself  was  God  (v.  1.  John  1: 
2,)  wished  to  become  man  and  personally  to  give  instruction  con- 
cerning God. 

VI.  In  the  sense  mentioned  in  <§>  75,  Adam  also  might  be  called 
the  Son  of  God  (Luke  3:  38,)  because  he  was  begotten  of  no  earth- 
ly father,  but  created  by  God  in  a  perfect  state. 

VII.  John  3:  16,  18.  1  John  4:  9,fiovoyevrjg  vlog&tov  the  only 
begotten  Son  of  the  Father.     Rom.  8:  32,  idiog  vlog  his  ownjSon. 

VIIL  John  14:  7—11.  (comp.  8:  19.  12:  45.)     Col.  1:  15.    2 

'  Cor.  4:  4,  elucov  rov  -^eov  the  image  of  God.   Heb.  1:  3,  dnavyaofia 

Ttjg  do^fjg  xai  yagaxiijg  zrjg  vnoataaeojg   ccviov   (O^tov)  i.  q.  fixrov. 

"  image  of  the  glory  and  transcript  of  the  being  (essence)  of  God.'* 

See  Schleusner,  art  duavyccafia,  and  Wisdom  7:  26. 


SECTION    LXXVII. 


More  particular  description  of  the  union  of  Jesus  with  God. 
This  union  of  Jesus  with  God  is  not  a  temporary  or  limited 

1  De  sensu  voc,  itXrKfmfia,^    10.         2  CommenUry  on  the  Hebrews,  p. 8. 


420  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  1Y, 

union,  like  that  of  other  rational  beings,  such  as  the  prophets  (John 
5:  26)  (1)  ;  but  so  close  is  this  union  that  according  to  the  dec- 
larations of  the  Holy  Volume,  the  Logos,  who  is  himself  God,  be- 
came man  (John  1:  1,  14,)  and  that  the  being  who  is  God,  is  like- 
wise man  ;(2)  and  inversely,  that  the  being  who  is  man,  is  likewise 
God  ;(3)  that  the  Being  who  is  eternal  life,(4)  who  was  with  the 
Father,(5)  became  visible  to  men,  in  the  form  of  a  man  1  John  1: 
1.  (6;)  and  that  inversely  he  who  lived  amongst  men  as  a  man, 
could  declare  concerning  himself,  that  he  came  from  heaven,  and 
had  previously  been  in  heaven. (7) 

Illustrations, 

I.  That  the  union  between  Christ  and  God  is  not  of  a  limited  or 
temporary  nature,  is  the  very  proposition  which  John  wished  to 
prove  in  his  Gospel  and  Epistles  ;  in  opposition  to  Cerinthus,  who 
maintained  that  the  higher  power  or  Christ  did  not  unite  himself 
with  the  man  Jesus  until  the  time  of  his  baptism,  and  abandoned 
him  again  at  the  approach  of  his  sufterings,  and  consequently  that 
their  union  was  neither  close  nor  perpetual.  That  this  was  St.  John's 
design  we  have  proved  in  the  work  On  the  Design  of  John's  Gos- 
pel and  Epistles.^ 

II.  In  the  first  chapter  of  Hebrews,  it  is  said  of  him  who  is, 
in  v.  8,  addressed  as  -^eog  or  God  iX9toa  06—6  -d^iog  2:0T  God 
anointed  thee — thy  God. 

III.  He  who  is  declared  to  have  been  Ik  imv  udelc^wv  tov  TTavlov 
to  xuTcc  aagxa  of  the  brethren  of  Paul,  i.  e.  of  the  Jews,  according 
to  the  flesh,  is  called,  in  Rom,  9:  5,  dfog  evXoytjzog  eig  Tovg  aiwvag 
God  over  all,  blessed  forever. 

IV.  In  1  John  5:  20,  »i  ^wj;  aiiovtog  life  eternal  is  a  synony- 
mous expression  with  {>e6g  God. 

V.  The  expression  that  Christ  "  was  with  the  Father"  refers 
to  him  not  as  man,  but  as  God.     John  1:  1. 

VI.  1  John  1:  2,  we  announce  to  you  that  eternal  life,  which 
was  with  the  Father  and  appeared  unto  us.  Thus  also  in  1  Cor. 
2:  8,  it  is  said,  the  Lord  of  glory  (o  Y.vgwgrrJQ  dohjg,)  which  was 
the  character  of  Christ  as  God,  (comp.  {Uog  TijgdoBrig,  Acts  7:  2,) 
was  crucified  ;  because  this  same  Lord  of  glory  simultaneously  lived 
among  men  as  man.  Still,  the  appellation  "  Lord  of  glory"  might 
refer  to  the  state  of  exaltation  of  the  man  Jesus  (§  78,)  and  the 
sense  of  the  passage  be  this  :  "  He  (that  man)  who  now  is  the  su- 

»  p.  181,  iai,45,  492.     On  John  5:  26,  see  §  76.  111.  2. 


^  78.]  HYPOSTATIC  UNION.  421 

preme  Lord,  whom  God  has  raised  to  so  high  a  dignity,  was  former- 
ly crucified  by  men."  Comp.  Acts  3:  13.  2:  36.  2  Cor.  13:  4. 

VII.  John.  3:  13,^  "  he  who  came  from  heaven,  the  Son  of  man 
who  was  in  heaven."  6:  62,  the  Son  of  man  ascending  to  where 
he  was  before.  In  1  Cor.  15:  47,  the  second  man  is  called  the 
Lord  from  heaven.  And  in  John  8:  58.  1:15,  30,  he  who,  as 
man,  was  younger  than  Abraham  and  John  the  Baptist,  is  repre- 
sented  as  having  had  an   existence  prior  to  them  both. 

"  When  divine  attributes  are  ascribed  to  the  Lord  Jesus  in  the 
N.  Testament  (says  Ernesti)  the  case  is  precisely  the  same  as  when 
predicates  are  affirmed  of  the  whole  man,  which  belong  only  to  his 
soul,  or  only  to  his  body."^  The  communicatio  idiomatum  results 
from  the  communio  naturarum,  and  the  latter  is  a  consequence  of 
the  unio  personalis  or  hypostatica. 


SECTION    LXXVIII. 


The  exaltation  of  the  man  Jesus,  presupposes  his  intimate  union 
with  the  godhead. 

The  perfection  and  dignity  which  are  conferred(l)  on  the  man 
Jesus  by  this  union,  are  seen  most  clearly  in  his  present  state  of 
exaltation. (2)  For  it  would  have  been  impossible  that  this  man 
(3)  could  have  been  raised  to  so  great  an  elevation  ;(4)  that  the  di- 
vine government,(5)  and  divine  honour(6)  could  have  been  confer- 
red on  him  and  he  have  been    made  Lord  over  all  ;(7)  nor  could 

1  The  design  of  St.  John's  Gospel,  p.  191. 

2  [On  the  important  subject  of  tlie  union  of  the  two  natures  of  Christ  in  one 
person,  which  enters  so  deeply  into  the  modus  operandi  of  the  atonement  of  the 
blessed  Redeemer  for  the  sins  of  the  world,  the  reader  will  be  gratified  by  the 
following  quotation  from  Dr.  Woods'  Letters  to  Unitarians,  p.  104  :  "  We  be- 
lieve that  all  the  divine  and  human  perfections,  which  the  Scriptures  ascribe  to 
Christ,  constitute  but  one  person  ;  and  consequently  that  all  his  actions  and  suf- 
ferings belong  to  him  as  one  person  ;  much  as  all  the  actions  and  sufferings  of 
any  man,  whether  mental  or  corporeal,  belong  to  him,  as  one  man.  It  results 
from  this  view  of  the  subject,  that  the  value  or  significancy  of  any  action  or 
suffering  in  Christ  must  be  according  to  the  dignity  or  excellence  of  his  whole 
character.  Whether  the  action  or  suffering  takes  place  particularly  in  one 
part  or  another  of  his  complex  person  it  is  attributable  to  his  whole  person  ;  and 
it  derives  its  peculiar  character  from  the  character  of  his  whole  person  constitu- 
ted as  it  is.  The  suffering  of  Christ  was  therefore  of  as  high  importance  or  val- 
ue, in  making  an  atonement,  as  if  it  could  have  been,  and  in  reality  had  been, 
in  the  most  proper  sense,  the  suffering  of  the  Divinity."  See  Reinhard's  Dog- 
matik,  §  92—96.     Mori  Epitomen.  Sartorii  Comp.  §  236.     S.] 


422  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IV. 

"  all  power  in  heaven  and  on  earth"  have  been  transferred  to  him  ; 
(8)  if  he  were  not(9)  in  so  close  a  union  with  the  Creator  and  Lord 
of  all  things,  that  he  could,  in  exercising  the  government  of  the 
world,  avail  himself  of  the  infinite  perfections  of  the  Logos,  as  his 
own. 

Illustrations. 

I.  "  It  is  the  Spirit,  or  that  invisible  Being,  which  had  previous- 
ly been  with  God  in  heaven,  which  maketh  alive  and  giveth«alva- 
tion.  John  6:  63,  the  flesh  (the  human  nature  without  this  Spirit) 
could  profit  nothing  (toward  giving  life  to  the  world.)  In  him 
dwell  the  entire  divine  perfections  visibly." 

II.  Christ  the  promised  Messiah. — The  exaltation  of  Jesus  pla- 
ced the  entire  signification  of  the  name  "  Son  of  God,"  in  a  clear 
light.  By  this  exaltation,  Jesus  w^as  designated  as  the  Son  and 
Ruler  over  all  vlog  &eov  h  dwa^Jiet,  Rom.  1:4;  he  became  like  his 
Father  in  dominion  and  honour,  and  in  this  respect  also  was  shown 
to  be  the  most  perfect  image  of  his  Father.  Both  in  Acts  13:  32 
and  in  Heb.  1:  4  etc.  the  words  of  the  Psalmist  (2:  7,)  vlog  fiov  d 
av,  eyo)  aijfifgov  yeyivvtjxa  of.  ''  Now  I  have  made  thee  mine 
image  in  reference  to  the  actual  dominion  over  all  things."  "  now 
thou  hast  become  my  Son,  xXrjgovofAog  naviojv"  are  referred  to  the 
exaltation  of  Christ.  And  in  as  far  as  the  title  "  Son  of  God"  em- 
braces the  idea  of  the  exaltation  over  all  things,  even  over  the  an- 
gels, so  far  Christ  became  Son  of  God  only  after  he  had  accom- 
plished the  work  of  atonement.^  In  the  term  '-Christ"  [the 
Anointed  *I"''J:7:,]  the  idea  of  likeness  to  God  in  point  of  dominion  is 
also  included.  This  is  evident  even  from  the  passage  Psalm  2:  2, 
to  which  we  are  to  trace  the  origin  of  the  word  Christ;  in  con- 
nexion with  V.  6,  7,  "  I  have  anointed  thee  my  King — thou  art  my 
Son  ;  to  day  have  I  made  thee  such."  At  that  time  when  Jesus 
became  "  Lord  over  all"  the  full  import  of  this  name  was  displayed 
(Acts  2:  36.)  Precisely  then  when  he  was  seated  at  the  right 
hand  of  God,  did  it  become  most  clearly  evident  that  he  was  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  see  Matt.  26:  63,  which  verse  shows  the 
fallacy  of  the  statement  made  in  Schmidt's  Bibliothek,^  that  those 
passages  of  Matthew  which  he  has  in  common  with  Mark  and  Luke, 
contain  no  evidence  of  the  higher  power  and  dignity  of  the  Mes- 
siah." (See  Luke  22:  69.  Mark  14:  62.)  But  Christ  is  not 
only  Lord,  but  specifically  the  Christ,  the  Messiah,  i.  e.  that  very 

1  Commentary  on  Hebrews,  p.  9. 
,    «  Vol.  I.  p.  63.    In  the  Christx)logy  of  Matthew. 


'J*  78.]  JESUS  THE  EXPECTED  MESSIAH.  423 


Lord  Acts  2:  36.  Luke  2:  11,  whom  God  had  in  general  terms 
predicted  by  Moses  as  the  future  king.  In  John  5:  46,  Jesus  him- 
self says — "  Moses  wrote  of  me  ;"  and  Luke  says,  ch.  24:  27,  44, 
'^*  and  beginning  at  Moses,  he  expounded  unto  them  the  things  con- 
cerning himself,"  and  "  he  said  unto  them,  all  things  must  be  ful- 
filled which  are  written  in  the  law  of  Moses  concerning  me."  And 
Paul  (Acts  26:  22)  addresses  Agrippa  thus  :  "  Having  therefore 
obtained  help  of  God,  I  continue — saying  none  other  things  than 
those  which  the  propliets  and  Moses  did  say  should  come.  Rom. 
3:  21.^  If  the  prophecy  in  Gen.  3:  15,  refers,  in  general,  to  a  pos- 
terity ynt  of  the  woman,  which  should  achieve  a  victory  over  thie 
serpent  or  Satan  ;  and  if  the  predictions  in  22:  18.  26:  4.  28:  14, 
refer,  in  general,  to  a  posterity  of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob, 
through  which  all  nations  should  be  blessed :  still  the  reference  is  to 
that  particular  individual  who  was  subsequently  announced  as 
Christ.^  From  the  time  of  David,  the  Lord  had  predicted  his 
coming  by  the  prophets.  Acts  2:  30.  13:23,22.  Luke  1:  32.— 
Heb.  1:  5.  Psalm  2:  7.  2  Sam.  7:  14.  And  he  was  really  looked 
for  as  the  person  who  "  was  promised"  by  the  prophets.  John  7: 
42.  1:  46,  we  have  found  Jesus  of  vvhom  Moses  and  the  prophets 
did  write  Luke  2:  38,  and  spake  to  all  them  that  looked  for  redemp- 
tion in  Israel.  Matt.  1 1 :  3,  5,  art  thou  he  that  should  come,  or  shall 
we  expect  another  ?  Josephus  tells  us  that  the  Jews  had  derived 
their  expectation  of  a  Messiah,  from  their  sacred  books  ;  and  Taci- 
tus says  :•*  an  opinion  was  entertained  by  most  persons,  that  accord- 
ing to  the  writings  of  the  priests,  at  this  very  time,  the  East  would 
prevail,  and  that  chieftains  from  Judea  would  acquire  the  govern- 
ment of  affairs.  Jesus  himself  gives  similar  testimony.  All  things 
(says  he)  must  be  fulfilled  which  were  written  in  the  law  of  Moses, 
and  in  the  prophets,  and  in  the  psalms  concerning  me. — How  then 
shall  the  scriptures  be  fulfilled,  that  thus  it  must  be  ?  Luke  24:  27, 
44—47,  18:  31.  22:  37.  Matt.  26:  54.  Mark  9:  12.  And  "after 
his  resurrection  Jesus  himself  explained  to  them  the  prophecies 
concerning  him  in  the  Old  Testament.  Luke  24:  45,  44.  It  is, 
therefore,  on  the  authority  of  Jesus,  that  the  apostles  made  such 
earnest  and   solemn   declarations  on  this  subject.     God   had  before 

1  Comment,  de  protevangelio. 

2  In  the  Comment,  on  Heb.  10:  7,  the  words  iv  7ta(paXiSi  ^t^h'ov  y^yQUTTTaijh 
is  written  in  the  volume  of  the  book,  are  explained  thus  :  •'  In  the  Mosain  writ- 
ings, in  as  far  as  iUey  treat  of  sacrifices,  which  were  appointed  as  types  of  a  fu- 
ture propitiatory  sacrifice.  (Rom.  3:21.")  On  the  passage  John  19:  3C,  see  su- 
pra, §  13.  III.  8. 

3  Pluribus  persuasio  inerat,  antiquis  saccrdotum  literis  contineri,  eo  ipso  tem- 
pore, fore,  ut  valesceret  Oriens,  profectique  Judaea  rerum  potirentur.  Histor.  lib. 
V.  §  13,     See  Diss,  de  notione  regni  coelestis,  §  1. 


424  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

announced  by  the  mouth  of  all  his  prophets  that  Christ  should  suf- 
fer— The  spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them,  testifed  beforehand 
the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  the  glory  that  should  follow — we  an- 
nounce unto  you  glad  tidings,  the  promise  which  was  made  unto 
the  fathers.  Acts  3:  18.  1  Pet.  1:11.  Acts  13:  23,  32.  In  Matt. 
26:  63,  Jesus  solemnly  declares  before  the  sanhedrim,  that  he  is  the 
Christ,  the  promised  Messiah  ;  and  in  v.  16,  17,  he  declares  that 
Peter's  conviction  of  his  Messiahship  was  not  a  mere  human  opinion, 
but  derived  by  instructions  from  God.  In  Luke  24:  25,  he  declar- 
ed it  foolishness  to  doubt,  that,  according  to  the  prophets,  the 
Christ  must  enter  on  his  glory  ;  and  in  John  17;  3,  the  reception  of 
Jesus,  whom  God  sent  as  the  Messiah,  is  declared  to  be  eternal 
life.  And  in  v.  20,  31,  John  declares  that  his  chief  design  is  to 
persuade  his  readers  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ.  See  1  John  2:  22. 
1  Cor.  15:  1 — 4.  Hence  it  is  impossible,  without  offering  violence 
to  the  authority  of  Jesus  himself,  to  deny  that  the  Old.  Testament 
contains  prophecies  and  various  prefigurations  of  him.^  Koppen 
remarks,  "  Jesus  and  his  apostles  very  frequently  declare  that  he  is 
the  promised  Messiah  ;  but  this  necessarily  includes  the  declara- 
tion that  the  Old  Testament  speaks  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah."^ 
And  Herder  in  his  Letters  on  the  Study  of  Theology,^  says,  *'  the 
apostles  and  evangelists  were  certainly  in  earnest  when  they  quoted 
the  passages  from  the  Old  Testament  and  applied  them  to  Christ ; 
they  found  him  predicted  every  where  in  the  Old  Testament,  and 
declared  unhesitatingly  that  *  of  him  bear  all  the  prophets  witness.' 
Jesus  himself  on  several  occasions  refers  all  Scripture  [the  Old 
Test.J  to  himself,  and  thus  regards  the  Old  Test,  in  general  as  a 
witness  for  his  cause.  I  cannot  see  how  it  is  reasonably  possible  to 
pervert  these  passages,  or  to  blunt  their  edge ;  or  especially,  how 
any  one  can  charge  Jesus  or  his  friends  with  a  designed,  ingenious 
accommodation  of  these  passages,  the  very  idea  of  which  is  repelled 
by  their  unlearned  simplicity.  On  the  contrary,  every  difficulty  is 
removed,  when,  agreeably  to  his  open  declarations,  we  receive  him 
as  the  sum  total,  as  the  ultimate  spiritual  end  of  the  whole  Old 
Testament,  and  regard  his  kingdom  as  the  promise  given  to  the 
fathers,  and  developed  by  the  prophets  more  or  less  remote,  with 
more  or  less  light  and  clearness." 

Hence  we  see  the  error  of  those  who  will  admit  of  no  real 
prophecies  concerning  Christ,  in  the  Old  Testament ;  and  who 
either  have  recourse  to  the  opinion  that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  ac- 

1  §  13.  Ill  7—12.  comp.  Michaelis  Dogmatik,  §  122—128.     Kleuker  de  ne^cu 
qualis  constat  inter  utrmnque  divinae  conslilutionis  foedus  prophetico,  p.  80. 
9  Bible  a  work  of  divine  wisdom,  Pt.  I,  p.  235. 
3  B.  18,21,p.  303,:349— 352. 


§  78.]  EXALTATION  Of  JESUS.  425 

commodated  themselves  to  the  erroneous  ideas  of  their  hearers  when 
they  spake  of  prophecies  relative  to  the  Messiah,  or  that  they  mere- 
ly intended  to  apply  these  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  to  the 
history  and  person  of  Jesus,  and  thereby  meant  nothing  more  than 
that  these  texts  suited  the  particular  events  and  the  person  of  Jesus. 
This  last  hypothesis  Eckermann  has  attempted  to  apply  throughout 
the  whole  of  the  'New.  Testament.^ 

III.  In  reference  to  his  divine  nature  it  is  impossible  that  Christ 
could  have  been  raised  to  a  higher  dignity,  or  be  made  Lord  of  the 
universe,  and  be  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  God  (Ephes.  1:  20.) 
The  power  over  all  things,  could  not  then  be  first  given  him  ;  in 
short,  he  could  not  then  first  be  made  Lord  by  the  will  and  power 
of  God.  Acts  2:36.  Heb.  1:4.  On  the  contrary,  we  honour 
(Phil,  2:  11)  and  acknowledge  the  supreme  dominion  of  God,  when 
we  really  acknowledge  as  Lord  the  man  whom  the  free  purpose  of 
God  raised  to  that  state.^ 

IV.  Exaltation  of  Jesus.— Acts  2:  23.  Phil.  2:  9,  God  hath 
highly  exalted  him — being  exalted  to  the  right  hand  of  God.  Heb. 
7:  26,  "  who  was  exalted  above  heaven  itself  (and  the  most  eleva- 
ted inhabitants  of  it.") 

V.  Eph.  1:  20,  (God)  set  him  on  his  right  hand  in  heavenly 
places.  To  be  "  seated^  at  the  right  hand  of  God,"  signifies,  to  be 
exalted  on  the  throne*  of  the  supreme  God  f  to  rule^  with  God,  to 
govern,  to  act,  as  God  governs  and  acts.  Compare  Acts  2:  34, 
where  the  same  passage  from  Psalm  110:  1,  is  adduced,  with  Acts 
2:  36,  where  his  being  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  God  is  explained 
thus  :  "  God  hath  made  him  both  Lord  and  Christ."  In  the  Comm. 
on  Heb.  1:  3,  note  Jc,  the  signification  of  the  phrase  ^'  sitting  at  the 
right  hand  of  God,"  is  more  particularly  explained  ;  and  in  the 
Dissert.  De  notione  regni  coelestis,  the  meaning  of  the  phrase 
"  right  hand"  is  given.  See  also  Schleusner  on  the  word  ^f|«a, 
and  Knapp's  programma  de  Christo  ad  Dei  dextram  sedente,  where 
parallel  passages  are  adduced  from  other  authors,  and  the  reasons 
stated  why  this  expression  must  be  referred  to  the  exaltation  of  the 
man  Jesus. 

VI.  Adoration  of  Jesus, — Phil.  2:  10,  that  at  the  name  of  Je- 
sus every  knee  shall  bow.     This  divine  honour  could  not  be  paid  to 

1  Theol.  Beitraege,  Vol.  I.  No.  3.  On  the  works  relative  to  the  prophecies  of 
the  Messiah,  see  Meyer's  Hermeneutica  of  the  Old  Test.  Pt.  II,  p.  4G8— 502. 

2  Commentary  on  the  Hebrews,  p.  9.  Dissert,  de  notione  regni  coelestis,  Note 
71.  On  the  Design  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  458,  507. 

3  Matt.  22:  42—44.  comp.  Psalra  110  1.  Col.  3:  1. 

-  4  Rov.  3:  21 .  Heb.  12:  2.  8:  1.  ^  Matt.  26:  64.  Heb.  1:  3. 

6  1  Cor.  15:25;  in  this  passage,  the  phrase,  "  sit  at  my  right  hand,  until'* 
(Psalm  110:  1.  Heb.  1:  13,)  is  explained  by  duavrov  paadexiiv. 

54 


436  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV.  | 

Jesus  if  he  were  a  mere  man,  and  if  God,  to  whom  alone  adoration 
belongs,  were  not  united  to  him  in  a  peculiar  manner.  See  the 
work  on  the  Design  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  506  etc.  The  phrase 
Tia^imeiv  yovv  bend  the  knee,  is  applied  to  the  worship  of  the  one 
God,  in  Rom.  11:4.  14:  11. 

VII.  Ephes.  1:  21.  Phil.  2:  9,  IJ,  wherefore  God  hath  highly 
exalted  him,  and  given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name  ; 
that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow  of  those  in  heaven 
and  those  on  earth,  and  those  under  the  earth,  and  that  every 
tongue  should  confess  that  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the 
Father.  1  Cor.  15:  27,  28,  he  bath  put  all  things  under  his  feet. 
Heb.  1:  2,  ov  i&tjxe  xXrjgovofiov  tiuvtcdv^  whom  he  constituted  Lord 
over  all  things.  Peter  also  calls  Jesus  Lord  over  all  (Acts  10:  36,) 
and  not  only  Lord  over  the  human  family,  but  Lord  over  all,  in 
that  comprehensive  sense,  which  embraces  angels  and  archangels 
within  its  sphere.  Ephes.  1:  22,  and  hath  put  all  things  under  his 
feet.  Heb.  1:  4,  he  is  as  much  superior  to  (greater  than)  the  an- 
gels, as  the  peculiar  name  (or  dignity)  which  he  hath  obtained,  is 
more  excellent  than  theirs. 

VIII.  Matt.  28:  18,  all  power  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and 
on  earth.  The  words  "  heaven  and  earth"  cannot  ►possibly  mean 
the  church  collected  from  among  Jews  and  Gentiles  ;  for  of  this  sig- 
nification the  words  can  by  no  means  admit  {§  42.)  But  according 
to  the  usus  loquendi  of  the  language,  they  mean  the  world.  This 
is  also  evident  from  those  passages  which  clearly  ascribe  to  Christ 
dominion  not  only  over  the  Jews  and  Gentiles,  but  over  the  whole 
world,  over  the  angels,  and  in  short,  over  all  things  which  God 
governs.  God  himself  alone,  who  put  all  things  under  him,  being 
excepted.  Phil.  2:  10.  Rev.  5:  13.  Psalm  135.  1  Cor.  15:  27.— 
Moreover,  in  Ephes.  1:  22,  the  church  is  specifically  mentioned  as 
a  part  of  the  whole  (v.  20 — 22,)  over  which  Christ  is  placed  as 
ruler,  tdcoxev  avzov  viifg  -ndvia  rr,  ixxktjalay  i]Tig  iazl  to  aiofia 
avTov  "  he  appointed  him  to  be  Lord  especially  over  the  church, 
with  which  he  stands  in  a  peculiarly  close  union."  Col.  1:  IS. 

IX.  John  17:  24,  which  (glory)  thou  (God  the  Father)  gavest 
me,  because  thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world. — 
Comp.  ^  42.  Col.  1:  15  compared  with  v.  16,  18,  19.  {§  76.  111. 
1.)  Rom.  1:  4,  and  powerfully  evinced  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  ac- 
cording to  the  spirit  of  holiness,  i.  e.  according  to,  or  on  account  of 
the  spirit  of  majesty,  on  account  of  that  in  Christ,  which  is  invisible 
and  supremely  excellent.^  In  the  technical  phraseology  of  system- 
atic doctrinal  theology,  the  subject  of  discussion  in  <§>  78,  is  termed 
genus  axiomaiicum  communicationis  idiomatum  [^iXTiMaig,]  and  in- 

1  Comment,  on  Hebrews  1:  2,  Note/. 


4  79,  80.]  EXALTATION  OF  JESUS.  427 

•eludes  those  propositions  of  Scripture  in  which  divine  attributes  are 
predicated  of  the  human  nature  of  Christ. 


SECTION    LXXIX. 

The  design  of  the  diversity  of  states  in  Jesus. 

The  reason  why  Jesus  did  not  obtain  an  exalted  dignity  imme- 
diately after  his  union  with  the  divine  nature,  is  to  be  sought  in  the 
work  which  he  was  destined  to  accomplish  on  earth.  In  like  man- 
ner, the  reason  why  he  now  makes  full  use  of  his  exalted  perfec- 
tions, is  to  be  sought  in  that  higher  destination  which  he  is  now^ 
fulfilling  ;  and  which  he  could  not  fulfil  without  the  full  use  of  the 
perfections  of  his  divine  nature(<§>  78).  But  the  divine  nature  of 
the  man  Jesus  could,  by  virtue  of  his  union  with  the  Godhead,  at 
any  time  have  displayed  itself  in  the  most  splendid  manner,  if  such 
a  display  had  not  been  inconsistent  with  the  plan  of  God.  And  his 
higher,  his  divine  nature,  really  was  displayed  as  far  as  comported 
with  the  divine  purposes  (Phil.  2:  6.  <§><5>  81,  82.) 


SECTION    LXXX. 


Description  of  Jesus^  state  of  humiliation. 

As  it  was  necessary  for  the  welfare  of  the  human  family  (Pt.  II. 
ch.  I.,)  that  Jesus  should  live  upon  earth  as  a  man  perfectly  like 
ourselves,(l)  sin  only  excepted  (<§>  75,)  that  he  should  experience 
the  afflictions  of  every  kind  to  which  man  is  subject,  and  even  sub- 
mit to  a  death  of  the  most  cruel  nature  ;(2)  so  also  it  was  the  will 
of  God,  that  his  Son  should  be  placed  in  such  a  situation  (Phil.  2: 
7j  8) — that  is,  tHe  higher  nature,  with  which  the  man  Jesus  was 
most  closely  united,  did  not  exert  as  great  an  influence  on  this  man, 
as  it  might  have  done  (Phil.  2:  6.  <§»  79)  and  as  it  afterwards  really 
did  («5>  78.)  For  example,  his  divine  nature  did  not  exert  its  pow- 
er to  elevate  and  extend  the  human  knowledge(4)  of  Jesus,  (who 


428  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

was  destined  to  pass  through  the  state  of  childhood  like  other  per- 
sons,) to  a  degree  which  would  not  have  co^mported  with  his  child- 
hood, or  generally  with  the  state  in  this  world  for  which  God  had 
designed  him.  The  divine  nature  forbore  to  exert  any  influence, 
by  which  the  situation  of  Jesus  would  have  been  rendered  more 
splendid  than  it  was  intended  to  be  during  that  particular  time  ;(5) 
i.  e.  it  did  not  produce,  in  and  by  the  man  Jesus,  who  was  united  to 
it,  those  effects  which  it  now  produces,  and  will  hereafter  produce. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Rom.  8:  3,  for,  what  the  law  could  not  do  because  it  was 
weakened  through  the  flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  like- 
ness of  sinful  flesh  and  on  account  of  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the 
flesh.  Heb.  4:  15,  a  high  priest  who  can  be  touched  with  the 
feeling  bf  our  infirmities,  but  was  in  all  points  tempted  like  as  we 
are,  yet  without  sin. 

II.  Matt.  20:  28.  Luke  24:  25,  46,  thus  it  behooved  Christ  to 
suffer.     1  Pet.  1:  10.  Heb.  2:  14—18. 

III.  Rom.  8:  3.  1  John  4:  10.  John  3:  16,  "  God  appointed  his 
Son  unto  death  (sent  him  into  the  world  for  the  purpose  that  he 
should  die.")  Gal.  4:  4, 5,  "  God  sent  his  Son,  as  a  man  like  unto 
us,  that  he  might  by  his  death  purchase  for  us  the  right  to  become 
children  of  God,  and  to  obtain  future  salvation." 

IV.  Luke  2:  40,  52,  and  the  child  grew -and  waxed  strong  in 
spirit,  filled  with  wisdom — And  Jesus  increased  in  wisdom  and 
stature.  Mark  13:  32,  but  of  that  day  and  that  hour  knoweth  no 
man,  no  not  the  angels  which  are  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but 
the  Father. 

V.  Heb.  2:  9,  but  we  see  Jesus,  who,  for  a  little  while,  was  put 
lower  than  the  angels,  who  for  the  suffering  of  death  was  crowned 
with  glory  and  honour  that  according  to  the  gracious  purpose  of 
God,  he  might  taste  death  for  every  man. 


SECTION    LXXXI. 


Jesus  voluntarily  submitted  to  this  state  of  humiliation. 

When  we  contemplate  Jesus  in  respect  to  his  human  nature,  we 
perceive  that  his  obedience  to  God(l)  and  love  to  men(2)  were  so 


^  81.]  THE  HUMILI1.TI0N  OF  CHRIST.  429 

Strong,  that  he  very  willingly  engaged  in  the  accomplishment  of  the 
benevolent  purposes  of  God  for  the  welfare  of  mankind,  and  betray- 
ed no  premature  desire(3)  for  that  greatness  and  dignity  which  his 
union  with  the  divine  nature  authorized  him  subsequently  to  expect, 
and  the  possession  of  which  was  at  least  possible  at  an  earlier  date. 

(4)  On  the  contrary,  he  voluntarily  assumed  an  humble  station, 

(5)  conducting  himself  not  as  Lord  but  as  a  servant  ;(6)  nay,  he 
even  humbled  himself  beneath  other  persons,  even  such  as  were  in 
the  lowest  temporal  circumstances,  and  finally  he  endured  the  most 
excruciating  sufferings,  and  submitted  voluntarily  to  the  most  dis- 
graceful death.  (7) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Chrisfs  obedience  to  God. — Rom.  5:  19,  by  the  obedience 
of  one.  John  6:  37  etc.  I  came  down  from  heaven  to  do  the  will 
of  him  that  sent  me.  Phil.  2:  8,  having  become  obedient  John 
14:  31,  as  the  Father  gave  commandment,  even  so  I  do.  18:  11. 
10:  17.  Matt.  26:  39,  not  as  I  will  but  as  thou  wilt.  v.  42,  thy 
will  be  done.  Heb.  5:  8,  though  he  was  the  Son  (of  God,)  yet 
learned  he  obedience  by  the  things  which  he  suffered.  10:  7 — 9,  lo 
—I  come  to  do  thy  will,  O  God. 

II.  His  love  to  mankind. — Phil.  2:  4.  2  Cor.  8:  9,  for  ye  know 
the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  though  he  was  rich,  yet 
for  your  sakes  he  became  poor,  that  ye  through  his  poverty  might 
be  made  rich.  Matt.  9:  11—13.  Luke  9:  54,  56,  the  Son  of  man 
came  not  to  destroy  men's  lives,  but  to  save  them.  Matt.  20:  26 
— 28,  the  Son  of  man  came  to  minister  [to  serve]  and  to  give  his 
life  a  ransom  for  many.  John  10:  11—15,  I  lay  down  my  life  for 
the  sheep.   15:  13.  1  John  3:  16. 

III.  Christ's  humility.— FhW.  2:  6,  ovx  agnayfioi^  r/yi^aaTO  ro 
thaciaa  {>£M  etc.  "Who  (Christ  Jesus)  being  in  the  form  of 
God,)  did  not  make  an  ostentatious  display  of  his  equality  with 
God."i 

IV.  The  humiliation  of  Christ  was  voluntary. — Just  as  in  Phil. 
2:  4,  it  is  attributed  to  the  benevolence  of  Jesus  and  not  to  a  ne- 
cessity, that  he  did  not  display  his  divine  dignity;  so  also  in  2 
Cor.  8:  9,  the  poverty  of  him  who  might  have  had  all  things  in 
abundance,  is  ascribed  to  his  goodness  [z«?«^J  which  aimed  at  the 
welfare  of  man.     nXovatog  cop  who  mifi^ht  have  been  rich.     So  also 


•  See  De  Wette's  Translation.     Store's  Dissert,  in  Epist.  ad  Philipp.  note.  c. 


430  or  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK. 


IV. 


Phil.  2:  6,  fv  f^ogqfrj  &€ov  -yTrapj^o}*' although  he  might  have  been  in 
the  condition  of  God.  On  the  word  nlovaiog  applied  to  spiritual 
things,  see  2  Cor.  6:  10.  James  1:  5.  Luke  22:  33—35.  18:  22. 

V.  Phil.  2:  7,  iavtov  ixtpcoae — this  may  either  be  translated 
thus  :  "  he  wished  to  do  without  (abstain  from)  the  splendour  of 
the  divine  glory — vacuus  esse,  carere  voluit"  (comp.  xevog  Luke 
20:  10 ;)  or  thus  :  "  He  wished  to  be  in  a  condition  less  exalted  (i. 
e.  more  humble)  than  that  in  which  he  might  have  been"  {xevog 
htog  tenuis,— p-^h  .  Jud.  11:  3.)^ 

VL  Mo  Qifrjv  d  ovXov^  so.  ^  iov,  la^co  v — As  Jesus 
after  he  had  attained  to  years  of  maturity,  was  so  willing  to  do  the 
work  assigned  him  (John  4:  34,)  he  clearly  proved  that  he  was 
perfectly  satis6ed  with  the  ordinary  condition,  "  the  form"  of  man, 
in  which  God  suffered  him  to  be  born,  and  that  he  was  well  pleas- 
ed to  live  in  this  state  of  humility.^ 

VII.  Phil.  2:  8,  "  sua  sponte  et  voluntate  humillimam  con- 
ditionem  pertulit,"  i.  e.  he  voluntarily  and  of  his  own  accord  sub- 
mitted to  the  most  humble  condition.  Comp.  2  Cor.  11:  7.  John 
10:  18,  no  man  taketh  it  (my  life)  from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  my- 
self; I  have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it 
again. 


SECTION    LXXXII. 


But  even  in  his  state  of  humiliation,  the  influence  of  the  divine  na- 
ture on  the  human  nature  of  Christ  manifested  itself 

The  dignity  which  was  conferred  on  the  man  Jesus  by  his  union 
with  the  divine  nature,  had,  even  in  his  state  of  humiliation,  at  least 
this  effect,  that  it  gave  to  the  obedience  and  sufferings  of  this  ex- 
alted man,  who  was  so  closely  united  to  the  Deity,  an  efficacy  of  an 
entirely  peculiar  nature. (1)  But  the  influence  of  the  divine  nature 
on  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  was  also  evinced  in  other  ways. — > 
Even  in  the  earlier  years  of  Jesus  an  instance  is  recorded  in  which 
he  acted  from  the  peculiar  impulse  of  his  divine  nature,  or  (<§»  44) 
by  the  express  command  of  his  invisible  Father.  (2)  Nor  is  it  im- 
probable that  the  extraordinary  improvement  made  by  Jesus  in  his 

'  See  Dissert,  in  Epist.  Pauli  minores,  p.  26. 
*  Reinhard's  Dograatik,  §  98.  No.  1. 


^  82.]  EFFICACY  QP  CHBIST^S  MERITS.  431 

childhood  (Luke  2:  40,  47)  was  promoted  by  that  divine  nature 
with  which  his  human  nature  was  united  ;  but  promoted  in  a  man- 
ner which  did  not  interfere  with  the  plan,  according  to  which  his 
physical  and  intellectual  abilities  were,  like  those  of  other  men,(3) 
gradually  to  increase  (v.  52.)  And  when  he  entered  on  the  duties 
of  his  prophetic  office,  his  divine  nature  and  the  Holy  Spirit  who 
was  so  closely  united(4)  with  his  human  nature,  exerted  on  the 
man  Jesus(5)  such  an  influence  as  was  required  by  his  office  as 
teacher,  and  effected  in  and  through  Jesus,  every  thing  which  was 
requisite  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  design  of  his  office  as  teach- 
er. Hence,  whatever  the  man  Jesus  taught,  he  taught  not  at  the 
instigation  of  his  own  feelings,  nor  according  to  his  own  views,(6) 
but  because  he  was  prompted  to  it  by  his  divine  nature,  and  by  the 
Father  and  Holy  Spirit(8)  who  are  most  closely  united  to  him,  and 
he  taught  also  in  the  manner(7)  which  they  suggested  to  him. (9) 
All  the  miracles  which  were  requisite  for  the  establishment  of  the 
divine  origin  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ(<§>  8,)  were  wrought  by  the 
omnipotence  of  his  divine  nature,(10)  which  is  one  with  the  om- 
nipotence of  the  Father  (§  44)  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  («^  41,) 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  man  Jesus.(ll)  In  short  the  di- 
vine nature  in  the  man  Jesus  effected  every  thing  which  was  requi- 
site to  the  accomplishment  of  the  design  of  his  destination,  in  a 
manner  suited  to  his  person  ;  e.  g.  it  gave  him  the  most  profound 
knowledge  of  the  persons  with  whom  he  had  intercourse. (12)  And 
so  entirely  did  he  depend  on  the  will  of  that  divine  nature  which 
was  united  with  him,  that  he  undertook  and  desired  nothing,  but 
what  was  suggested  to  him  or  wrought  in  him  by  this  divine  nature. 

(13) 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  efficacy  of  Christ's  merits  dependent  on  his  twofold  na- 
ture.— The  salvation  bestowed  on  us,  or  our  participation  in  the 
happiness  of  Christ,  was  the  reward  of  the  obedience  of  Christ. — 
But  this  reward  Jesus  could  confer  on  us,  only  because  he  himself, 
in  consequence  of  his  original  union  with  the  Godhead,  was  incapa- 
ble of  any  increase  of  personal  happiness  as  a  reward.  But  the 
difficulty  of  the  bestowment  of  salvation,  and  the  holiness  of  the 
punitive  sanctions  of  the  divine  law,  are  placed  in  a  clearer  light, 


432  Q7  THE  BEDEfiMER.  [bK.  IV. 

the  more  dignified  the  person  was  in  whom  such  fearful  sufferings 
were  requisite  to  the  accomplishment  of  this  noble  design.  When 
the  man  Jesus  is  called  the  author  of  our  salvation  (John  6: 51,  53,) 
it  is  not  the  mere  man  Jesus  who  is  alluded  to,  but  that  man  who 
was  most  closely  united  to  him  that  was  in  heaven  (v.  62,  19,  11, 
9,)  that  man  who,  on  account  of  his  union  with  God,  could  perform 
works  which  mere  human  power  could  never  produce  :^  in  short 
the  allusion  is  to  the  greatness  and  the  worth^  of  that  man  who  on 
occount  of  his  union  with  the  divine  nature,  is  the  only  Son  of  God 
(<§>  76.)  This  great  man  and  this  one  alone  is  our  Redeemer. — 
Col.  1:  13,  15—19.  comp.  14,  20—22.  John  3:  13—17.  1  John 
4:  9,  10.  Rom.  8:  3,  32.  Heb.  1:3.  5:  8,  9. 

Notes.  1.  In  the  Dissert.  II.  in  Libros  N.  T.  historicos,  p.  69, 
it  is  remarked,  that  in  John  19:  11,  above  referred  to,  Jesus  alluded 
to  his  union  with  God  by  the  word  avw&sv  from  above,  whilst  his 
explanation  at  the  same  time  affords  a  reply  to  Pilate's  question 
"  whence  art  thou."  (v.  9.) 

2.  To  this  place  belongs  the  genus  apotelesmaticum  communica- 
iionis  idiomaium^  which  embraces  those  propositions  in  which  the 
person  of  Christ  is  the  subject,  and  some  act  belonging  to  his  media- 
torial work,  the  predicate. 

II.  Luke  2:  49,  "  Know  ye  not  that  I  have  another  father  than 
Joseph,  the  performance  of  whose  injunctions  must  engage  my  at- 
tention ?  eivac  Iv  Toig  jiargog  fiov. 

III.  Phil.  2:  7  etc.  He  was  made  in  the  likeness  of  men — and 
found  in  fashion  as  a  man.  Heb.  2:  17,  it  behooved  him  in  all 
things  to  be  like  unto  his  brethren. 

IV.  John  16:  14.  15:  26.  Rom.  8:  9.  Gal.  4:  6.  comp.  <^  45. 

'  V.  Acts  10:  38,  God  anointed  him  (Jesus)  with  the  Holy  Spir- 
it. God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure  unto  him.  This  says  the 
credible  witness  (5:  32.)  John  the  baptist  concerning  Christ.  Luke 
4:  1,  14,  Jesus  returned  from  his  baptism  full  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
nXi]Q7]g  TiPsvfxaTog  uylov,  and  went  in  the  spirit,  tvnvavuuTv/mioXhe 
desert,  and  returned  thence  in  the  power  of  the  Spirit. 

VI.  John  5:30.  8:  28.   12:  49.   14:  10.  compare  ^6. 

VII.  The  excellence  and  credibility  of  Christianity  a  necessary 
result  of  the  divinity  of  its  Author. — ^The  doctrines  of  the  man 
Jesus  are  expressly  attributed  to  him  who  had  been  in  heaven  with 
the  Father,  who  came  from  heaven — and  united  himself  with  the 
man  Jesus.  John  3:  11 — 13.  6:  46.  1:  18.  And  the  credibility 
of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  on  which  the  faith  of  Christians  in  the  au- 


.^1  John  6:  63.  comp.  §  78.  III.  1. 

''2  1  Pet.  1:  19.     See  the  work  On  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  603.    Heb. 
12:  3,  reflect,  who  he  is  that  suffered  so  mueh  contradiction. 


^  82.]  TWOFOLD  NATURE  OP  CHRIST.  433 


thority  of  the  other  divine  messengers  depends,  is  the  more  evident 
and  indubitable,  because  the  man  Jesus  did  not  enjoy  the  influence 
and  aid  of  God  merely  at  particular  times,  nor  merely  in  a  limited 
degree.  John  3:  34.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  distinguished  from 
all  other  divine  messengers,  by  this  great  preference,^  that  the  di- 
vine power  which  spake  to  mankind  through  him,  belonged  to  his 
own  person  and  was  peculiar  to  it  (5:  26.)  Hence,  in  the  case  of 
Jesus,  the  doubt  can  never  be  urged,  whether  the  omniscient  pow- 
er of  God  aided  him  in  every  instruction  given  by  hifn,  without  ex- 
ceptk«i  ;  or  whether  we  cannot  imagine  to  ourselves  a  revelation 
immediately  from  God,  which  should  be  more  perfect  than  that 
given  by  God  ttirough  Jesus.  And  accordingly  we  are  told,  that 
the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  constitute  the  most  perfect  revelation.  Matt. 
11:  27.  John  I:  18.  Col.  2:  8—10.  But  for  this  very  reason,  the 
doctrines  of  Jesus  demand  from  us  the  most  profound  veneration  f 
a  veneration  proportionate  to  the  dignity  of  that  divine  Messenger 
by  whom  these  doctrines  were  taught,  through  the  person  of  Jesus, 
who  is  in  a  peculiar  and  close  union  with  God,^  and  is  himself  the 
Son  of  God. 4 

VIII.  The  Father  and  Holy  Ghost  are  one  with  the  Son. — 
John  14:7—11.   16:  13—15.  compare  ^^44,  45. 

IX.  Jesus  taught  the  things  which  he  had  received  from  the 
Father  and  Holy  Spirit.— John  12:  49.  5:  30.  8:  26,  28,  40.  15: 
15.  17:  8.  Matt.  11:  27.  3:  34.  comp.  §6. 

X.  All  the  miracles  of  Jesus  were  wrought  by  his  divine  na-' 
ture. — Hence  Jesus  himself  is  described  as  the  author  of  his  mira- 
cles. John  11:  25.  [I  am  the  resurrection  etc.]  compared  with  23. 
5:  17.  [My  Father  worketli  hitherto  and  1  work.]  19 — 21,  26. — 
Hence  it  is  said  of  Jesus,  that  he  manifested  his  own  greatness  by 
his  miracles  2:  1 1.  [This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus  in  Cana  of 
Galilee  and  manifested  forth  his  glory.]  comp.  1:  14. 

XL  John  14:  10.   10:  32,  37.  Matt.  12:  28.  compare  <5»  8. 

XI L  Through  his  divine  nature,  Jesus  Tcnew  every  thing  which 
was  requisite  for  him.. — John  2:  24,  25.  [But  Jesus  did  not  com- 
mit himself  unto  them  because  he  knew  them  all.  And  needed  not 
that  any  one  should  testify  of  man,  for  he  knew  what  was  in  man.] 
6:  64.  16:  19,  30.  [Thou  knowest  all  things,  and  needest  not  that 
any  man  should  ask  thee.]  1:  48.  Matt.  9:  3.  [And  Jesus  knowing 
their  thought,  said  etc.]  comp.  with  Mark  2:  6 — 8. 


!  *  John  3:  21.     10:  3C.  compare  on  this  passage  §  13.  III.  17.   and  §42. 
i»  See  John  3:  32—36.  Heb.  1:1.2:  3.  3: 1—8.  10:  28.  12:  25. 
S  See  John  3:  31.  Heb.  12:  25. 

4  Matth.  21:  37.  John  3:  35:  Heb.  1:  1.  Compare  the  work  on  the  Object  of 
the  death  of  Christ,  685,  "  In  proportion  as  a  revelation  is  clear  and  perfect,  i« 
the  greatness  of  our  guilt  in  rejecting  it." 

55 


434  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IV. 


XIII.  But  Je&us  did  and  wished  to  do  nothing j  but  what  his  di- 
vine nature  suggested  or  approved. — John  5:  30,  I  can  of  myself 
do  nothing.  8:  29,  and  he  that  sent  me  is  with  me  ;  the  Father 
hath  not  left  me  alone ;  for  I  do  always  those  things  that  please 
him. 


SECTION   LXXXIII. 

Description  of  Chrisfs  state  of  exaltation. 

After  Jesus  had  submitted  to  that  death  which  had  been  appoint- 
ed for  him  by  the  decree  of  God  ;  the  divine  nature(l)  that  was 
united  to  hinfi,  and  the  omnipotence  of  which  is  the  omnipotence  of 
the  Father,(2)  restored  to  life  his  body,  which  had  been  dead  and 
buried.  (1  Cor.  15:  3  etc.  comp.  <^  8.  111.  3.)  After  the  resus-' 
citation  of  his  body,  Jesus  showed  himself  alive(3)  at  many  differ- 
ent times  during  forty  days  ;  partly  in  order  to  cheer  and  strengthen 
his  followers,(4)  and  partly  in  the  most  perfect  manner  to  convince 
those  of  his  return  to  life,  who  were  to  be  the  future  witnesses  and 
publishers(5)  of  this  all-important(6)  event.  At  length,  whilst  he 
was  engaged  in  conversation, (7)  he  was  visibly  raised  on  high,  and 
thus  withdrawn  from  the  sight  of  men, (8)  and  is  now(9)  in  heaven^ 
that  is,  in  a  place  remote  from  this  earth,  inaccessible  to  the  wicked, 
(10)  where  he  will  eternally(ll)  enjoy  a  distinguished  happiness, 
(12)  and  exercise  the  exalted  privilege  of  governing  all  things  with 
divine  power  (<§.  78.) 

Illustrations. 

I.  John  2:  19,  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them.  Destroy  this 
temple  (my  body  v.  22)  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up.  10:  18, 
I  have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  (^ti/i/j/, 
life)  again.  Comp.  <§>  42. 

!I.  The  omnipotence  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  is  the  same. — 
John  10:  28—30.  (comp.  >§.  44,  42.)  5:  19,  for  whatsoever  things 
he  (the  Father)  doeth,  these  also  doeth  the  Son  likewise  v.  20,  21, 
for  as  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  quickeneth  them,  even 
so  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  will.  Hence  also  the  resuscitation 
of  Christ,  is  sometimes  ascribed  to  the  Father.  Rom.  6:  4.  8i  11., 
Eph.  17:  19  etc.  | 


^  63.]  DESCENT  OF  CHRIST.  435 

-  III.  Agency  of  Christ  during  the  forty  days  after  his  resurrec- 
tion.— Acts  1:  3,  to  whom  (the  apostles)  he  showed  himself  alive, 
after  his  passion,  by  many  infallible  proofs,  bein^  seen  of  them  forty 
days.  We  find  at  least  one  example  in  the  New  Testament,  to 
prove  to  us  that  Christ  was  also  engaged  in  the  invisible  world, 
during  the  forty  days  in  which  he  occasionally  appeared  to  his  dis- 
tiples,  see  1  Pet.  3:  19.  4:  6.  comp.  <§>  66.  111.  3.  Whether  he 
visited  the  abodes  of  the  damned  (among  whom  I  do  not  class  the 
nvev^ara  tv  qvXaxrj  "  spirits  in  prison"  or  ransomed  spirits,  <§>  66. 
111.  3,)  is  a  point  which  cannot  be  decided  ;  for  there  can  be  no 
passage  adduced  in  which  it  is  expressly  declared.  The  words  of 
Eph.  4:  9,  y.ciTi(3rj  itg  tcc  xcxicoTtjgci  fitgrj  trjg  yr^g  descended  into  the 
lower  parts  of  the  earth,  which  have  been  applied  to  the  descent  of 
Christ  into  hell,  are,  in  the  Dissert,  in  Epist.  Pauli  minores,  Note 
68,  explained  as  referring  to  Christ's  state  of  humiliation  on  earth, 
to  which  Jesus  is  said,  in  other  passages,  to  have  descended  (at  his 
incarnation)  from  heaven,  and  which  state,  is  in  opposition  to  heav- 
en (vipogKphes.  4:  3,  10,)  described  as  being  low,  xaiojisga,  John 
6:  38,  62.  3:  13.   16:  28.i 

IV.  John  14:  19.  ]6:  20 — 22,  your  sorrow  shall  be  turned  into 
joy.  20:  15—17,  20.  Luke  24:  32,  52.  See  Herder  on  the  Res- 
urrection, Sect.  4.  No.  1. 

V.  Acts  10:  40.  2:  32.  3:  15.  Luke  24:  46—48.  1  Cor.  15: 
II.   1  Tim.  3:  16.     Compare  <§.  8.  111.  3. 

VI.  Objects  of  Christ's  showing  hsmself  to  his  disciples  during 
the  forty  days.^The  humiliating  death  which  terminated  the  life  of 
Jesus,  may  have  tended  to  excite  doubts  in  the  minds  of  some,  as 
to  the  divinity  of  his  mission  (Matt.  27t  39 — 43,  Luke  24:  20,) 
although  it  had  been  established  by  such  a  multitude  of  proofs. — 
John  15:  24.  Matt.  27:  42.  But  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  which 
was  not  possible  till  after  his  death,  and  which  is  the  greatest  of  all 
his  miracles,^  and  was  the  more  striking,  as  the  humiliating  execu- 
tion of  this  remarkable  man  had  arrested  the  attention  of  thousands  f 

\  [SeeMorus'  Epit.  theol.  Christ,  p.  189.  Reinhafd's  Dog.  §  102.  On  the 
difFerent  views  of  the  descent  of  Christ  into  hell,  see  Pott  Epist.  cath.  Vol.  II. 
Excurs.  III.  On  the  subject  of  this  doctrine,  theologians  of  diiferent  centuries 
appear  to  have  known  more  than  is  taught  by  the  apostles.  1  Pet.  3:  19,  is  the 
chief  and  almost  the  only  passage  referring  at  all,  to  this  doctrine.  In  the  opin- 
ion of  that  learned  and  consummate  divine  Dr.  Reinhard,  the  follovving  defini- 
tion of  the  Descent  of  Christ,  embraces  all  our  knowledge  on  the  subject:  "  Est 
ea  animi  Cliristi  corpore  soluti  actio,  qua  animis  eorum  qui  diluvio  perierunt, 
quaedam  nuntiavit,  in  librissacris  baud  patefacta."     S.] 

2  Jesus  frequently  referred  to  this  miracle  even  during  his  life  time, before  he 
had  performed  it.  John  2:  18—22.  Matt.  12:  38-40.  16:  1—4.  See  Flalt  s  Mag- 
azine, St.  4.  S.  190—199. 

3  Matt.  27:  62.  Mark  15:  39,  the  exclamation  of  the  Roman  centurion  "  Truly 
tliis  man  was  the  Son  of  God." 


436  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  '   [bk.  ir, 

put  all  these  doubts  to  flight,  and  vindicated  the  honour  of  Jesus  m 
the  most  perfect  manner.^  It  afforded  a  new,  an  absolutely  incon- 
trovertible, an  ocular  demonstration  of  the  truth  of  the  declarations 
of  Jesus  relative  to  his  union  with  God,  and  proved  that  his  preten- 
sions were  not  groundless  and  irreverent,  but  sanctioned  by  the  di- 
vine Being  himself,  who  raised  him  from  the  dead.  John  14:  19. 
Acts  17:  31.  2:  24.  1  Tim.  3:  16,  idixaioiOrj  h  Tiv^v^aii  he  wa? 
justified  in  the  spirit,  i.  e.  "  He  was  by  his  glorified  state,  declared 
credible  and  upright."  It  proved  that  all  the  doctrines  which  he 
taught,  were  absolutely  certain  and  true,  inasmuch  as  their  truth  de- 
pended on  the  reality  of  his  union  with  God.  {^  6.)  The  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection,  for  example,  and  that  of  the  future  blessedness 
of  the  saints,  were  confirmed  by  his  own  return  to  life.  1  Pet.  1:  3. 
1  Thess.  4:  14.  1  Cor.  6:  14.  2  Cor.  4:  14.  Rom.  8:  11.  His 
resurrection  proves,  by  a  demonstration  of  the  fact,  that  though 
death  is  our  certain  lot  (John  19:  33.)  it  by  no  means  follows  that 
a  future  life  is  impossible.  1  Cor.  15:  12,  13,  15  etc.  fi  vexgoi 
ovx  lyiiQovTaij  ovdi  Xgiarog  iy^yf greet  if  the  dead  rise  not,  neither 
was  Christ  raised.  Paul  is  here  opposing  persons  who  denied  the 
possibility  of  a  resurrection  and  future  existence  ;  otherwise  he 
could  not  have  appealed  to  the  case  of  Christ  which  was  peculiar 
in  its  nature,  and  might  have  been  the  only  instance  of  its  kind. — 
See  Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  II.  p.  333  ;  and  Herder  sup.  cit.  There 
is  moreover  some  connexion  between  the  resurrection  of  Christ  and 
our  future  happy  existence  in  heaven,  because  Jesus  in  his  predic- 
tions placed  his  own  eternal  life  in  connexion  with  the  eternal  life  of 
his  own  peculiar  people,  and  hence  we  are  led  to  believe  that  the 
other  part  of  the  promise  will  be  fulfilled,  as  well  as  the  first,  the 
completion  of  which  we  have  witnessed.  1  Cor.  15:  20 — 23,  in 
Christ  all  shall  be  made  alive.  Acts  5:  30,  the  God  of  our  Fathers 
raised  up  Jesus,  whom  ye  slew  and  hanged  on  a  tree  ;  him,  the 
Prince  and  Saviour  (i.  e.  Prince  of  salvation)  hath  God  exalted  to 
his  right  hand,  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  and  the  fogiveness  of 
sins.  Heb.  5:  9.  Our  salvation  is  dependent  on  the  obedience  of 
Christ ;  and  the  honour  which  God  has  thus  conferred  on  him  by 
fulfilling  his  specific  expectation  of  a  speedy  return  to  life,  affords 
us  a  satisfactory  proof  that  Christ  has  yielded  this  obedience  in  a 
manner  acceptable  to  God. 

John  6:  57.  compare  v.  54.  10: 17, 10,  28.  11:  25.  12:  26,  32. 
14:  2.  17:  22,  24.  (^  62.)  1  Cor.  15:  17,  and  if  Christ  be  not 
raised,  your  faith  is  vain  ;  ye  are  yet  in  your  sins.  Rom.  4:  25,  who 
was  raised  again  for  our  justification.  1  Pet.  1:  21,  who  by  him  do 
believe  in  God,  that  raised  him  up  from  the  dead,  and  gave  him 

1  Acts  3:  13,15.  1  Pet.  1:21. 


,  ^  83.]  Christ's  kingdom  is  eternal,  437 

I  glory,  that  your  faith  and  hope  might  be  in  God.  John  10:  17. 
Luke  24:  44.  Matt.  27:  63,  40.  28:  6. 

I       VII.     Christ  gave  his  disciples  various  instructions  after  his  res- 

i  urrection,  until  the  time  of  his  ascension.  Acts  1:3,  speaking  of 
the  things  pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  Luke  24:  45,  v.  27. 
Hence  Peter  may  have  derived  from  Christ  himself  the  information 
of  that  incident  in  the  world  of  spirits,  which  he  relates  I  Pet.  3: 
19  etc,  and  which  occurred  between  the  resurrection  and  ascension 

;i  of  Jesus. 

VIII.  His  ascension. — Acts  I:  9,  and — while  they  beheld,  he 
!  was  taken  up,  and  a  cloud  received  him  out  of  their  sight. 

IX.  Ascension  of  Jesus  to  heaven. — That  he  really  ascended  to 
j  heaven,  was  testified  by  the  celestial  messengers  at  the  very  time 
I  the  event  occurred.  Acts  1:  10  etc.  We  should  indeed  be  au- 
thorized to  believe  it  on  the  mere  prediction  of  Jesus,  since  his 
authority  was  so  remarkably  confirmed  by  his  resurrection  from  the 
dead.  John  6:  62.  16:  28.  20:  17.  Matt.  26:  64.  But  there  are 
also  some  other  events  which  he  had  predicted  previously  to  his 
death,  and  just  before  his  ascension  (Acts  1:  4,)  and  the  fulfilment 
of  which  he  expressly  fixed  after  his  return  to  bis  Father,  which 
serve  as  facts,  to  prove  his  return  to  the  Father,  and  his  consequent 
dominion.  John  16:  7,  if  I  depart,  I  will  send  him  (the  Comforter) 
to  you.  14:  2,  he  that  believeth  in  me  etc. — and  greater  works  shall 
he  do,  because  I  go  to  my  Father.  In  Acts  2:  33 — 36,  Peter  ex- 
plains the  miracle  at  the  Pentecost  as  an  evidence  of  Christ's  having 
attained  that  government  of  all  thins:s,  which  he  had  said  awaited 
him  after  his  ascension,  rrj  df'Siu  tov  -^iou  vipca&fig — axovttt 
therefore  being  exalted  to  the  right  hand  of  God,  and  having  re- 
ceived of  the  Father  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  hath  shed 
forth  this  which  ye  now  see  and  hear.  Matt.  16:  28,  "  a  part  of 
those  who  now  stand  here,  will  see  the  Son  of  Man  arrived  in  his 
glory,  i(tx6f46P0v  iv  trj  ^aaUettx  avrov  ;  i.  e.  the  greater  part  of  my 
disciples  will  live  to  see  those  important  events,  such  as  my  ascen- 

1  sion,  the  miracle  at  Pentecost,  and  other  miraculous  events  for  the 
promotion  of  their  apostolic  office,  and  finally  also  the  destruction  of 

;  Jerusalem  ;  from  which  they  will  see  that  the  Son  of  man,  whom 
now  the  world  despise  and  undervalue,  really  possesses  divine  power. 

X.  The  abode  of  Christ. — Jesus  is  taken  from  you  into  heaven 
— whom  the  heavens  must  receive — who  is  gone  into  heaven  and  is 
on  the  right  hand  of  God — seek  those  things  which  are  above, 
where  Christ  sitteth. — Again,  1  leave  the  world  and  go  to  the 
Father — and  what  if  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  ascend  to  where 
he  was  before  ? — I  go  unto  him  that  sent  me,  ye  shall  seek  me  and 
not  find  me,  and  where  I  am  thither  ye  cannot  come — In  my 
Father's  house  there  are  many  mansions — I  go  to  prepare  a  place 


438  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

for  you,  that  where  I  am  ye  may  be  also.  Acts  1:  11.  3:  21.  1 
Pet.  3:  22.  Phil.  3:  20.  Col.  3:  1—3.  John  16:  28.  6:  62.  7:  33. 
8:  21,23.   14:2,  3.   12:  26. 

XL  Chrisfs  kingdom  is  eternal. — Christ,  being  raised  from  the 
dead,  dieth  no  more — he  shall  reign  forever,  and  of  his  kingdom 
there  shall  be  no  end — having  no  end  of  life,  but  made  like  unto 
the  Son  of  God,  abideth  a  priest  continually — a  priest  after  the 
power  of  an  endless  life, — a  priest  forever — but  this  one,  because 
he  continueth  forever,  hath  an  unchangeable  priesthpod, — he  ever 
liveth — fear  not,  I  am  the  First  and  the  Last,  I  am  he  that  liveth 
and  was  dead,  and  behold  1  am  alive  forever  more — and  he  (Christ) 
shall  reign  forever  and  ever.  Rom.  6:  9.  Luke  1:  33.  Heb.  7:  3. 
15—17,  23—25.  Rev.  1:  17,  18.   11:  15. 

In  the  Dissert,  de  notione  regni  coelestis,  <§>  V,  it  Is  shown  that 
in  1  Cor.  ch.  15^  a  termination  of  Christ's  kingdom  is  not  proved 
either  by  verse  25,  «;fp«?  ov  (tcog  civ  Matt.  22:  44)  until  he  hath  put 
all  enemies  under  his  feet  ;^  or  by  v.  24,  where  the  words  ojav 
nagadM  vrjv  ^aadeluv  ico  nurgl,  are  to  be  explained  thus  :  "  When 
Christ  shall  deliver  the  dominion  over  all  his  enemies,  into  the  hands 
of  the  Father,  i.  e.  when  he  shall  have  compelled  all  his  foes  to 
acknowledge  ihe  universal  dominion  of  the  Father."     See  «§>  63. 

XIL  Christ  will  enjoy  an  eternal  and  exalted  happiness.) — 
John  14:  28,  "if  ye  loved  me,  ye  would  rejoice  because  I  go  to 
the  Father  ;  for  the  Father  enjoys  a  happiness  and  glory  which,  in 
my  present  situation,  I  do  not  enjoy,  but  which  I  also  shall  enjoy 
with  the  Father."  [(Aal^ojv  ^ov  taiiv  see  supra  «§>  42.)  John  17:  5, 
24.  Com  p.  <§>  42.  1  Tim.  3:16,  dvaXr,cfj&ti  Iv  doiri  he  was  receiv- 
ed to  glory  ;  in  antithesis  to  i(faviQ(t){rr}  Iv  oagxi  "  he  appeared  as  a 
feeble  man."  Rom.  8:  29,  17,  heirs  of  God,  and  joint  heirs  with 
Christ.     Comp.  <§>  64. 


1  See  Schleusner's  Lexicon,  art.  £OJS  No.  5. 


BOOK    IV. 

OF    THE    REDEEMER. 


PART    If. 

THE  DIFFERENT  WORKS  OF  CHRIST  (HIS 
OFFICES.) 

SECTION  I. 

THE  WORKS  OF  THE  REDEEMER  DURING  HIS  LIFE  ON  EARTH. 


SECTION   LXXXIV. 


Twofold  destination  of  Jesus. 

The  man  Jesus  was,  like  all  other  men,  and  all  rational  creatures 
in  general,  under  obligation(l)  of  obedience  to  his  Creator,  his 
Lord(2)  and  his  God. (3)  This  obedience  Jesus  was  required,  for 
a  certain  length  of  time,  to  yield ;  and  amid  circumstances,  too, 
which  might  appear  surprising,  when  we  reflect  on  the  exalted  mor- 
al excellence  of  his  character,  and  his  very  peculiar  union  with  God 
(Heb.  5:  8.)  But  the  cause  of  all  this  is  to  be  sought{4)  in  the 
twofold  destination^^)  of  Jesus  ;  he  being  appointed  by  God  to  in- 
struct mankind,  and  also  himself  to  provide  that  salvation  which  he 
published  to  them. (6) 

Illustrations. 

I.  See  the  work  On  the  design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  666. 

II.  1  Cor.  3:  23,  Christ  is  God's  11:  3,  the  head  of  Christ  is 


440  ^  or  THE  REDEEMER.  -^  [bK.  IT. 

God,  (i.  q.  VTiOTuaaeTcct.  is  subject  to  God,  Ephes.   5:  24.)  1  Cor. 
15:  28.     See  <§»  24. 

III.  Jesus  salth — I  ascend  unto  my  God — Jesus  cried,  My  God, 
my  God  ! — the  God  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ — in  the  temple  of  my 
(Jesus')  God — thy  God  hath  anointed  thee  (Jesus.) — I  will  put  my 
trust  in  him.  John  20:  17.  Matt.  27:  46.  Ephes.  1:  17.  Rev.  3: 
12.  Heb.  1:  9.  2:  13.  In  these  words  does  the  Messiah  acknowl- 
edge his  dependence  on  him  through  whom  are  all  things. 

IV.  Heb.  2:  14  etc.     ^  85  etc. 

V.  Heb.  3:  1 ,  ujioGTokog  xal  dg'/^^O^^S  r»7?  Ofioloylag  rlfAWv  *Iri- 
aoi;?"  Jesus  the  Messenger  (Instructor,)  he  through  whom  we  have 
reconciliation,  whom  we  profess."  See  Introd.  to  the  Epist.  to  the 
Heb.  p.  oil. 

VI.  Heb.  2:  3,  which  (salvation)  at  first  was  published  by  the 
Lord. 


SECTION   LXXXV. 


Of-  Christ^s  office  as  instructor  [his  prophetic  office,)  and  the  obe- 
dience which  he  displayed  in  the  execution  of  it. 

The  union  of  Jesus  with  God,  enabled  him  to  execute,  in  a  more 
perfect  manner,  the  duties  of  his  appointment  as  divine  Messenger, 
(1)  or  as  a  prophet  ;(2)  that  is,  it  enabled  him  the  better  to  deliver 
those  divine  instructions(3)  with  which  he  was  intrusted. (4)  <§>  82. 
Yet  was  it  necessary  for  him,  during  this  time,  to  withdraw  the 
splendour  of  his  greatness  and  dignity,  and  to  become  like  unto  the 
rest  of  his  fellowmen,  yea,  even  to  assume  a  station  peculiarly  hum- 
ble(5)  amongst  mankind.  Otherwise,  he  could  not  have  discharged 
the  duties  of  a  real  Instructor,  he  could  not  have  taught  publicly 
and  perseveringly  like  other  prophets.  He  could  not  by  uninter- 
rupted instruction,  have  qualified  certain  persons  (<§>  9,)  whom  he 
had  himself  chosen,  to  perpetuate  the  office  of  instructor,  which  he 
had  commenced.  In  short,  he  could  not  have  sustained  an  office, 
in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  which,  it  was  necessary  for  him 
not  only  occasionally  to  appear  to  individual  persons,  but,  to  live  in 
the  midst  of  frail  mortals, (6)  and  to  inspire  even  persons  in  the 
lower  stations  of  life(7)  with  a  high  degree  of  confidence  in  a  person 


§  85.]  THE  OFFICES  OF  CHRIST.  441 

SO  far  exalted  above  them.(8)  Moreover,  the  example  of  obedience, 
which  the  life  of  Jesus  holds  forth  for  our  imitation, (9)  is  instructive 
to  us  in  proportion (10)  as  the  circumstances  under  which  he  was 
placed  bear  a  near  resemblance  to  our  own  situation  (Phil.  2:  7.) 
And  the  humility  of  our  present  situation  will  have  the  less  influ- 
ence on  those  splendid  expectations  with  which  the  religion  of 
Jesus  inspires  us,  when  we  reflect  that  Jesus  himself  experienced 
(11)  the  greatest  depths  of  human  misery;  although  some  beams  of 
his  effulgent  greatness  shone  forth  (*§>  82)  from  him  in  the  midst  of 
his  humility,  and  although  the  latter  part  of  his  history  on  earth  (§ 
83)  clearly  proved  how  dear  he  was  to  God,  and  to  what  an  ex- 
alted glory  he  was  destined. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Christ  was  the  divine  Messenger, — John  17:  6 — 8,  18.  20: 
21.  Comp.  <5>6.  Heb.  3:  1. 

II.  A  prophet. — John  4:  44,  ngoqiriTri?'  Matt.  13:  57.  Luke  4: 
24—27.  Heb.  1:  1,  2. 

III.  Our  Instructor. — John  7:  16  etc.  13:  13  etc.  6  didanvtaXog 
a  teacher.     Matt.  23:  8,  10,  one  is  your  (Teacher)  Master,  Christ. 

IV.  The  work  of  Christ. — 1  John  17:  4,  the  work  which  thou 
gavest  me  to  do.  The  work  or  appointment  of  which  Jesus  here 
speaks,  does  indeed  include  his  death  also  ;^  but  a  part  of  it,  at  least, 
was  to  communicate  to  men  his  divine  doctrines,  and  to  substantiate 
their  divinity  by  miracles,  John  5:36.  15:24.  10:37.  14:10. 
John  9:  4,  5,  I  must  work  the  works  of  him  that  sent  me  (said  Je- 
sus)— I  am  the  light  of  the  world.  By  tgyov  nargog  or  "  work  of 
the  Father,"  is  meant  doctrines,  as  we  learn  from  the  context.  5: 
36,  30.  4:  34,  comp.  v.  27,  32.  7:  16—18,  he  that  seeketh  the 
glory  of  him  that  sent  him,  the  same  is  true.  6:  37,  40.  Luke  1: 
33,  "  I  was  born  for  the  purpose  of  being  a  king,  and  1  came  into 
the  world  that  I  might  bear  witness  to  that  which  is  true  ipa 
fiagTvgi]G(o  rtj  cclTj^tftn,  to  testify  that  I  was  born  to  be  a  king."^ 
Now  Jesus  testified  by  his  instructions  that  he  was  a  king.  Matt.  4: 
17,  23.  Consequently,  he  came  into  the  world  to  give  instruction. 
Luke  4:  43,  but  I  must  publish  the  kingdom  of  God  to  other  cities 
also.     Mark  1:  38. 

In  the  last  discourses  of  our  Lord,  he  considered  death  as  havmg 

1  The  Design  of  John's  Gospel  etc.  p.  189. 

2  John  8:  28,  40,  42.  12:  44.  18:  37.    Comp.   Moras'  Epit.  Theoloff.  chriit.  p. 
194. 

66 


442  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

been  already  endured,  and  hence,  in  this  respect  also,  he  could  say, 
I  have  finished  the  work  izeXelojoa  to  tgyov ;  of  which  his  death 
was  certainly  a  part.  John  10:  17.  14:  31,  11.  "  It  is  in  general 
not  inconsistent  with  the  usuge  of  language  to  contemplate  an  event 
which  is  near,  as  really  present.  And  on  the  verge  of  his  departure 
it  was  peculiarly  suitable  for  him  to  present  to  them  the  bright  side 
of  an  event  so  painful  to  their  feelings,  and  call  their  attention  to 
the  glorious  consequences  which  would  result  to  them."*  This  re- 
mark is  applicable  to  Teller's  Antitheses,  prefixed  to  Harwood's 
four  Dissertations  (p.  xxxv,)  and  to  Oertel,^  who  infers  from  the 
passage  just  quoted,  that  the  death  of  Jesus  was  not  an  essential 
part  of  the  work  which  he  accomplished,  because  Jesus  declares, 
previously  to  his  death,  that  he  had  finished  the  work  which  God 
gave  him  to  do.^ 

V.  Humble  state  of  Jesus. — Matt.  8:  20,  the  Son  of  man  hath 
not  where  to  lay  his  head.  13:  55.  The  carpenter's  son.  11:  19, 
the  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners.  Luke  2:  24.  The  reader  may 
find  several  other  collateral  objects  of  that  humble  state  in  which 
God  placed  J^sus,  in  Keil's  Dissert,  de  exemplo  Christi  recte 
imitando,  p.  25. 

VI.  VVhen  the  situation  of  Jesus  was  no  longer  like  that  of  other 
men  on  earth,  he  no  more  dwelt  among  mortals,  but  ascended  to 
heaven.  And  even  in  the  interval  between  his  resurrection  and 
ascension,  during  which  time  he  still  gave  instruction  to  his  follow- 
ers, (John  20:  17.)  he  was  not  always  with  them,  but  only  appear- 
ed to  them  and  spent  some  time  with  them  on  particular  occasions. 

VII.  Jesus  dwelt  among  those  in  low  circumstances  of  life. — 
The  people  which  sat  in  darkness  saw  a  great  lighi'^ — they  that  are 
sick  need  the  physician. — He  had  compassion  on  them,  because 
they  were  as  sheep  having  no  shepherd.  Matt.  4:  12,  16.  9:  12, 
36.  Mark  6:  34. 

VIII.  Matt.  II:  28,  29,  come  unto  me,  all  ye  that  labour  and 
are  heavy  laden — for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  heart.  Luke  15:  1. 

IX.  The  example  of  Christ. — Keep  my  commandments,  even 
as  I  have  kept  my  Father's  commandments.  Love  one  another  as 
I  have  loved  you — It  shall  be  among  you, — even  as  the  Son  of  man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister — he  that  saith  he 
abideth  in  him,  ought  himself  also  so  to  walk  even  as  he  walked — 
"If  we  conform  our  lives  in  the  world  to  the  example  of  Christ, 

1  The  work  On  the  Design  of  John's  Gospel  and  Epistles. 

2  Dissert,  on  the  Epist.  to  the  Romans,  p.  509. 

3  See  Schwartze  on  the  death  of  Christ  as  an  essential  part  of  bis  scheme  for 
the  salvation  of  mankind,  Leipsic,  J795,  p.  163  etc, 

4  HessOber  die  Lehren  Thaten  and  Schicksale  des  Herrn  S.  37. 


^  86.]  PRIESTLY  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST.  443 

then  is  our  confidence  in  the  love  of  God  complete" — and  we  ought 
to  lay  down  our  lives  for  the  brethren^ — let  this  mind  be  in  you, 
which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus, — walk  in  love,  as  Christ  also  hath 
loved  us.  John  15:  10.  13:  34.  Matt.  20:  26—28.  1  John  2:  6. 
4:  17.  3:  16.  Phil.  2:  5.  Ephes.  5:  2. 

X.  Subject  continued. — 1  Pet.  2:  21,  for  even  hereunto  were 
ye  called,  because  Christ  also  suffered  for  us,  leaving  us  an  example, 
that  ye  should  follow  his  steps. 

XI.  Christ  bore  the  cross  before  us, — John  15:  20,  if  they 
have  persecuted  me,  they  will  persecute  you  also.  Matt.  10:  25. — 
John  12:  24 — 26,  "  If  any  man  will  serve  me,  let  him  follow  me  as 
one  who  is  going  (v.  23)  forward  toward  the  sufferings  of  death  (v. 
27,  32,)  and  thereby  to  glory  (v.  25.")2  1  Pet.  3:  17,  "  It  is  bet- 
ter to  suffer  in  doing  good,  if  such  be  the  will  of  God,  than  to  suffer 
on  account  of  evil  deeds."  v.  18,  "Christ  also  suffered  as  a  just 
person,  dyu&onoiiZv,  and  now  lives  forever  in  glory .""^  1  Pet.  4: 
12,  think  it  not  strange — but  rejoice  inasmuch  as  ye  are  partakers 
of  Christ's  sufferings.  Rom.  8:  17,  joint  heirs  with  Christ,  if  so  be 
that  we  suffer  with  him.  2  Tim.  2:  11,  it  is  a  faithful  saying,  If  we 
be  dead  with  him  (Christ,)  we  shall  also  live  with  him.  Heb.  12:2. 


SECTION   LXXXVI. 


Mediatorial  office  of  Christ. 

The  agency  of  the  Redeemer  in  accomplishing  that  salvation 
which  was  promised  to  man,  embraces  two  kinds  of  works.(l)  One 
part  of  this  destination (2)  he  accomplishes,  by  his  residence  in 
heaven  ;  The  other  he  effected,  while  he  sojourned  on  earth  {% 
87.)  In  reference  to  the  former,  we  may  repose  the  greater  confi- 
dence in  him ;  as  he  gladly  abstained  from  any  premature  use  of 
the  dignity  of  his  nature,  in  the  execution  of  the  divine  will,  and 
thus  leave  us  no  ground  to  apprehend(3)  that  he  might  use  that  do- 
minion which  he  has  at  length  acquired,  in  any  other  manner  than 
in  consistence  with  the  will  of  God,  the  Author  of  our  salvation. — 
We  are  certainly  authorized  to  expect,(4)  with  the  most  perfect  as- 

1  On  the  design  of  John's  Gospel  etc.  p.  213  etc. 

2  See  Dissert,  in  lib.  N.  T.  histor.  p.  20. 

3  On  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  523. 


444  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK  .  IT. 

surance,  that  he,  who  out  of  love  to  us  relinquished  for  a  season  the 
enjoyment  of  the  dignity  of  his  nature,  and  submitted  to  many  and 
various  kinds  of  human  sufFerino:,  will  dischargee  the  duties  of  that 
honorable  ofSce  which  he  sustains  in  heaven  for  our  good,  with 
perfect  propriety,  and  with  a  compassionate  reference  to  our  pe- 
culiar circumstances.  (5) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Priestly  office  of  Jesus. — The  appellation  of  high  priest 
agxtfgevg^  which  is  applied  to  Jesus  in  Heb.  3:  1,  refers  to  both 
kinds  of  the  Redeemer's  works.  (<§>  84.  III.  5.)  For  it  marks  out 
the  celestial  dignity  and  divine  government  of  Jesus,  as  being  bene- 
ficial to  the  human  family  ;  and  combines  together  the  salutary  in- 
fluence of  this  exalted  nature  of  Christ,  and  his  death  of  reconcilia- 
tion which  he  endured  on  earth.  This  is  the  import  of  the  sacer- 
dotal entrance  of  Christ  into  heaven.  Heb.  8:  1,  2,  4,  we  have 
such  an  highpriest,  who  is  set  on  the  right  hand  of  the  throne  of 
the  Majesty  in  the  heavens.  5:  5,  so  also  Christ  did  not  assume 
the  glory  of  highpriest  himself.  7:  26,  for  such  an  highpriest 
became  us — who  is  higher  than  the  heavens,  v.  28,  "  The  sworn 
declaration  (Psalm  110:  4)  which  was  made  after  the  introduction 
of  the  law,  maketh  the  Son  highpriest  who  is  transferred  into  eter- 
nal glory."  Heb.  5:  9,  being  made  perfect,  he  became  the  Author 
of  eternal  salvation  unto  all  them  that  obey  him,  called  of  God  an 
Highpriest.  7:  24,  25,  but  this  one  hath  an  unchangeable  priest- 
hood, wherefore  he  is  able  also  to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that 
come  unto  God  by  him.  6:  19,  20.  8:  3,  "  every  highpriest  is  in- 
ducted into  office  in  order  that  he  may  offer  sacrifice.  Consequently 
this  (our  Highpriest)  must  also  have  something  to  offer."  The  act 
of  dying  as  a  sacrifice  is  not  a  priestly  act ;  but  the  act  of  offering 
the  victim  vvhich  was  slain,  in  the  sanctuary.  This  act,  however, 
could  not  be  performed  on  earth,  where  Christ  had  no  sanctuary, 
but  only  in  heaven  (v.  4.)  The  Socinians  do  not  err  in  connecting 
his  priestly  office  with  his  entrance  into  heaven,  but  in  taking  from 
him  that  bloody  sacrifice  of  atonement,  which  he  had  to  offer  on  his 
entrance  into  heaven  as  highpriest.  9:  12,  14  by  his  own  blood,  he 
entered  once  into  the  holy  place. — The  blood  of  Christ,  who  in  a 
state  of  eternal  glory  offered  himself  to  God  as  a  perfect  offering, 
dia  Tii'fVftuTog  aicopwv — [TTViVfuurixoi',  dido'^uofiii^op.]  Heb.  10:  12, 
having  brought  one  sacrifice  for  sins,  which  is  valid  forever,  hath 
set  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God.  v.  14,  19 — 22,  "  We  may 
confidently  enter  the  holy  of  holies  [heaven]  with  the  blood  of 
Jesui — which   new  and  by  no  means  dangerous  way,  through  the 


^  87.]  CHRIST  THE  AUTHOR  OF  OUR  SALVATION.  445 


I  veil — I  mean  the  state  of  humiliation  of  Jesus— he  hath  consecrated 
I  for  us." 

II.  See  Part  2  infra  ;  and  '^  65  supra. 

III.  Heb.  5:  5,  7,  "  the  dignity  of  the  office  of  highpriest,  was 
not  arrogated  to  himself  by  Christ,  who  in  tlie  time  of  his  humilia- 
tion implored  deliverance  with  tears."  Hence  we  may  justly  infer, 
that  he  will  discharge  the  duties  of  that  honourable  office,  in  the  at- 
tainment of  which  he  so  entirely  submitted  to  the  will  of  God,  in 
perfect  accordance  with  the  gracious  purpose  of  God,  and  fully 
answer  tlie  purposes  of  his  priestly  office. 

IV.  Heb.  2:  17,  wherefore,  in  all  things,  it  behooved  him  to  be 
made  like  unto  his  brethren,  that  he  might  be  a  merciful  and  faith- 
ful Highpriest  with  God,  to  make  reconciliation  for  the  sins  of  the 
people — having  been  tempted,  he  is  able  to  succour  them  that  are 
tempted.  4:  15.  5:  8,  ''  Althougli  Christ  felt  no  sinful  propensities 
in  his  soul,  he  can  still  have  compassion  for  sinful  man,  inasmuch  as 
he  has  experienced  at  least  the  difficulty  of  obedience,  and  thence 
can  infer  what  must  be  the  feelings  of  those  who,  in  addition  to  an 
innocent  dread  of  pain,  labour  under  a  propensity  to  sin  and  diso- 
bedience." 

V.  "The  exposure  of  Jesus  to  the  endurance  of  suffering  was  a 
suitable  preparation,  to  qualify  him  for  the  office  of  saving  suffering 


SECTION    LXXXVII. 


Chrxit  could  acquire  the  right  of  bestowing  salvation  on  mankind 
only  as  the  reward  of  his  own  obedience. 
Although  Jesus,  by  virtue  of  the  greatness  and  perfection  result- 
ing from  his   peculiar  union  with  God,  would  have  been  able  to  be- 
^stow  a  high  degree  of  happiness  on  mankind  {§  60 — 65  ;)  he  was 
>  prevented  from   using  the  power  and  dignity  of  his  person  for  the 
accomplishment  of  this  purpose,  by  the   character  of  man  himself, 
which  rendered  him  unworthy  of  enjoying   such  a  happiness.     In 
order,  therefore,  that  he  might  bestow  salvation  on  his  brethren(l) 
in  a  manner  consistent  with   the  law  of  God,  it  was  necessary  that 
the   man  Jesus  should  in  conformity  to  the  same  law  of  divine  jus- 
tice (<§>  24,)  by  which  all  other  men  were,  on  account  of  their  diso- 
bedience, denied  the  enjoyment  of  this  great  salvation,  purchase  to 


446  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IY. 

himself  the  right  and  power, (2)  to  avail  himself  of  his  greatness  in 
the  salvation  of  his  brethren,  and  to  transfer(3)  to  them  that  blessed- 
ness which  he  possessed,  and  which  they  could  not  obtain  by  their 
own  merits.  For,  although  Jesus  might  from  the  beginning  have 
enjoyed  the  consequences  of  his  union  with  God  just  as  he  now 
does,  and  although  he  might,  in  a  state  of  happiness  and  splendour 
also,  have  evinced  his  obedience  in  a  manner  corresponding  to  such 
a  state,  as  he  now  really  does  ;(4)  still  God  assigned  to  him  a  very 
different  theatre  for  the  display  of  his  obedience  whilst  on  earth,  a 
sphere  which  was  apparently  inconsistent  with  the  dignity  of  so 
exalted  a  man,  and  assigned  it  to  him  under  the  condition  that  for 
this  distinguished  obedience  he  should  also  be  rewarded  in  a  distin- 
guished manner.  But,  inasmuch  as  his  dignity  and  happiness, 
being  the  result  of  his  peculiar  and  perfect  union  with  God,  were 
incapable  of  augmentation  (<5>  82.  111.  1  ;)  This  dignity  and  happi- 
ness were  at  least  bestowed  on  him  in  a  manner  which  gave  them 
the  nature  of  a  reward  ;(5)  bestowed  on  him  with  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  merited  honour,  that  he  was  peculiarly  worthy (6)  of 
this  distinguished  glory ;  and  with  the  power  to  accomplish  his 
most  ardent  wishes  in  bestowing  salvation  on  his  brethren,(7)  who 
in  themselves  were  unworthy  of  such  felicity.  He  was  elevated  to 
that  dignity  not  only  because  it  was  suitable  to  his  peculiar  union 
with  God,  but  he  was  raised  as  the  Author  of  salvation  to  mankind, 
in  remuneration  of  (8)  his  distinguished  obedience.  The  obedience 
to  God  and  the  active  reverence  for  him,  which  were  evinced  by  the 
man  Jesus  on  earth,  together  with  the  honourable  declaration  j 
{dixtti(of4a  Rom.  5:  18.)  and  reward  which  succeeded,  are  the  cause ! 
of  the  salvation  of  man  ;(9)  just  as  the  disobedience  and  punishment ! 
of  our  first  parents  (Rom.  5:  19,  16)  were  the  cause  of  the  misery! 
of  the  human  family  (<5  55,  57.) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Rom.  8:  29,  That  he  (Jesus)  might  be  the  First-born  among! 
many  brethren.  Heb.  2:  11,  he  (Jesus)  is  not  ashamed  to  call; 
them  brethren.  | 

II.  John  17:  2,  thou  hast  given  him  (Jesus)  power  over  all  flesh, | 
that  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given  him. 

HI.  John  17:  22,  24,  the  glory  (said  Jesus)  which  thou  gavesti 


§  87.]  CHRIST  THE  AUTHOR  OP  OUR  SALVATION.  447 

me,  I  gave  to  them  (Comp.  <5>  64.)  Heb.  9:  16,  "  Jesus  when  dy- 
ing bequeathed  his  salvation  to  believers  ;  they  are  his  heirs  under 
the  condition  of  his  death. "^ 

IV.  1  Cor.  15:  28.  John  20:  17.  Rev.  3:  12.  comp,  ^  84. 

V.  The  exaltation  of  Jesus  is  the  reward  of  his  obedience,—^ 
Phil.  2:  8,  Wherefore  God  also  hath  highly  exalted  him  and  given 
him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name — Heb.  2:  9,  for  [on  ac-' 
count  of]  the  suffering  of  death  crowned  with  glory  and  honour  12: 
2,  who  (Jesus,)  for  the  joy  that  was  set  before  him,  endured  the 
cross. 

VI.  John  10:  17,  therefore  doth  my  Father  love  me,  because  I 
lay  down  my  life.  Eph.  5:  2,  (Jesus)  hath  given  himself  for  us,  an 
offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God,  for  a  sweet-smelling  savour.  Heb. 
1:  9,  therefore,  O  God  !  thy  God  hath  anointed  thee  with  the  oil  of 
gladness.  Rev.  5:  12.  Just  as  the  obedience  of  Jesus  was  render- 
ed more  splendid  by  the  sufferings  of  his  death,  so  also  was  the 
honour  enhanced,  which,  on  account  of  this  obedience,  he  derived 
from  the  subsequent  enjoyment  of  his  glory.  This  he  enjoys  not 
only  as  the  natural   privilege  resulting  from  his  natural  union  with 

I  God,  but  also  as  the  reward  of  his  moral  excellence.^ 
I  VII.  John  17:  26,  I'va  »;  ayunri,  ^V  tjydntjaag  ^f,  ii/  amo7g  tj 
I  (instead  of  «/»??  tijtf  dydnrjv  eig  aviovg)  "  that  thy  love  to  me  may 
i  be  extended  to  them."^  Ephes.  1:  6,  he  hath  made  us  accepted  in 
I  the  beloved.  Gal.  2:  20,  Cj?  **'  ^f'ol  d  Xgtaxog  "  my  life  and  sal- 
j  vation  are  properly  speaking,  his  life,  or  participation  in  his  salva- 
tion." 

VIII.  Acts  5:  31.  (comp,  -§»  65.)  Heb.  5:  9,  "  having  received 
I  the  promised  reward,  he  has  become  the  Author  of  an  eternal  sal* 
j  vation  to  all  them  that  obey  him." 

IX.  Rom.  5:  19,  so  also  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be 
I  made  righteous.  ^'  Inasmuch  as  Christ  could,  on  account  of  his 
I  resurrection  and  glory,  be  declared  obedient  or  just  (v.  18,)  there- 
!  fore  justification  unto  life  has  been  extended  to  all  men."  For  it 
;  was  a  principal  part  of  the  solemn  declaration  of  his  righteousness, 
i  or  of  the  reward  of  his  obedience,^  that  he  could  now  treat  all  men 
j  as  just  and  obedient,  and  bestow  salvation  on  them.^ 

1  Comment,  in  loc.  note.  p.  **  On  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  663  etc. 
I      3  Ibid.  p.  592.  4  Isaiah  53:  10—12.  5  On  the  design  of  the  death  of 

*  Jesus,  §  14. 


448  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 


SECTION    LXXXVIII. 

Jesus  displayed  his  obedience  throughout  his  whole  life,  but  par- 
ticularly at  his  death. 

Through  the  whole  course  of  his(l)  earthly  pilgrimage,  even  from 
his  childhood, (2)  did  Jesus  display  this  obedience.  But  it  shone 
with  additional  lustre  during  his  public  ministry, (3)  and  was  seen  in 
its  greatest  glory(4)  amid  the  sufferings  of  that  ignominious  death  to 
which  he  submitted. (5) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Chrisfs  obedience  extended  throughout  his  whole  life.—-' 
John  8:  29,  I  do  always  the  things  that  please  him  (my  Father.) 
Matt.  3:  15,  "  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  all  the  divine  commands." 
Compare  James  1:  20,  dixaionvvri  ^eov.^  Phil.  2:  6,  7.  2  Cor.  8: 
9.  Comp.  <§)  81. 

II.  In  his  childhood. — Luke  2:  49,  51,  52. 

III.  In  his  public  office. — John  4:  34,  my  meat  is  to  do  the  will 
of  him  that  sent  me.  John  6:  38.  5:  30, 1  seek  not  mine  own  will, 
but  the  will  of  the  Father  who  hath  sent  me.  7:  18.  8:  49,  I 
honour  my  Father,  v.  55,  I  keep  his  saying,  26,  28,  as  my  Father 
hath  taught  me,  I  speak  these  things.  17:  6,  I  have  glorified  thee 
on  earth,  v.  12,  I  have  kept  them  in  thy  name.  v.  4.  J  2:  49. 

IV.  But  most  clearly  in  his  death,  and  the  sufferings  connected 
with  it. — Phil.  2:  8.  Heb.  5:  8.    Hence  our  salvation,  which  is  the 
fruit  of  the  obedience  of  Jesus  {§  87,)  is  specifically  described  as  the  | 
effect  of  his  greatest  obedience  ;  is  represented  as  the  effect  of  his 
sufferings  and  death.  Ernesti  has  objected  to  the  division  of  Christ's 
obedience  into  active  and  passive,^  on  the  ground  that  all  obedience  i 
is  active.     Yet  this  division  (says  Reinhard^)  may  still  be  retained  I 
to  designate   that  the  obedience  of  Christ  amid  his  sufferings,  was 
the   highest  degree  of  his  obedience.     John  6:  51,  and  the  bread | 
(said  Jesus)  which  I  will  give  is  my  flesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the 
life  of  the  world.     12:  24,  but  if  it   (the   grain  of  wheat)  die,  it 
bringeth  forth  much  fruit.     3:  14 — 16.   1  John  4:  9,  10,  God  sent 
his  only  begotten   Son  into  the  world,  that  we  might  live  through! 
him — he  sent  his  Son  to  be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins.     1  Thess.| 
— —  i 

'  Dissert,  de  scnsu  vocis  Sixcuof,  §  IX.         2  Theol.  Bibl.  vol.  9,  p.  925. 
3  Dogmatik.  S.  406. 


'^  89.]  THE  OBEDIENCE  OP  CHRIST.  449 

5:  9,  10  (Christ)  died  for  us,  that  we  should  live.  Heb.  10:  19, 
having  therefore  boldness  to  enter  into  the  holiest  by  the  blood  of 
Jesus.  Moreover,  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  was  the  particular 
design  of  the  death  of  Christ,  is  the  foundation  of  our  salvation.  <§> 
89  etc.  Heb.  9:  15,  and  for  this  purpose  he  is  Mediator  of  the  New 
Covenant,  that  by  means  of  (his)  death  for  redemption  from  the 
transgressions  under  the  first  covenant,  they  who  were  called  to  the 
eternal  inheritance,  might  receive  the  promise. 

V.  Jesus  submitted  to  death  voluntarily. — John  10:  17,  no 
man  taketh  it  (my  life)  from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  myself  v.  18, 
this  commandment  have  I  received  of  my  Father.  14:  31,  as  the 
Father  gave  me  commandment,  even  so  I  do.  This  Jesus  says 
whilst  going  forward  to  his  death.  18:  11,  the  cup  which  my  Fath- 
er hath  given  me,  shall  I  not  drink  it  ?  See  also  Matt.  26:  52 — 54, 
39,  42.  Heb.  10:  7,  9.  The  work  on  the  design  of  the  death  of 
Jesus  ;^  Hess'  BibHotheca  of  sacred  history,^  in  the  article  "  Prag- 
matic narrative  of  Christ's  sufterings  ;"  where  it  is  proved  that  every 
way  to  escape  death  was  left  open  to  Jesus  by  the  providence  of 
God,  and  that  therefore  according  to  every  historical  evidence,  it  is 
an  incontrovertible  fact,  that  his  submission  to  death  was  perfectly 
voluntary. 


SECTION    LXXXIX. 


1  The  remission  of  our  sins  is  the  grand  design  of  Chris fs  voluu' 
tary  sacrifice  of  himself. 

The  meritorious  and   exemplary  obedience  of  Jesus  was  certain- 
'  1y  placed  in  a  clearer  and  more  splendid  point  of  view,  by  his  sub- 
mitting to  so  excruciating  a  death  (^  88.  111.  4.)     This  submission 
to  death,  also,  made  him  experimentally  acquainted  with  the  misery 
I  incident  to  the  lot  of  man,  in  its  highest  degree.     But  even  in  his 
I  previous  life,  he  had   not   wanted  opportunities  to  prove  his  obe- 
dience.    Nor  was  he  without  opportunity,  previously  to  his  igno^ 
minious  death,  to  exercise  himself  in  self-denial,(l)  or  to  learn  by 
experience  the  miseries  of  man. (2)     Indeed  his  obedience  would 
have  been  perfect,  had  not  God  required(3)  of  him  that  he  should 

1  p.595.  apt.  Up,  354. 

57 


450  or  THE  REDEEMER.       -  [bK.  IV. 

submit  to  the  punishment  of  such  a  horrible  death.  There  must, 
therefore,  have  been  some  very  important(4)  reason  on  account  of 
which  God  would  absolutely  require, (5)  that  his  only  begotten 
(Rom.  8:  32.  Heb.  5:  8.)  Son  should  subject  himself  to  the  most 
terrible  sufferings.  Nor  are  we  left  to  conjecture  ourselves  what 
this  reason  might  be,  inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Volume  expressly 
teaches  us,  that  the  object  of  the  death  of  Christ  was,  to  procure 
remission  of  sins, (6)  or  to  deliver  mankind  from  future  misery (7) 
after  the  present  life,(8)  as  well  as  from  the  fear  of  this  punishment 
(9)  in  the  life  that  now  is. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Phil.  2:  4—7.  2  Cor.  8:  9.  comp.  <§.  81,  82. 

II.  Persecutions  of  Jesus.— M-dU.  8:  20.  (^  85.  111.  8,)  17:  17, 
perverse  generation  1  how  long  shall  I  suffer  you  ?  He  was  slander- 
ed. Mark  8:  17.  Matt.  10:  25.  11:  19.  12:  24.  The  Jews  inten- 
ded to  cast  him  down  a  precipice.  Luke  4:  28.  The  Pharisees 
consulted  together  what  they  might  do  to  Jesus,  when  he  cured  the 
lame  man  on  the  Sabbath.  Luke  6:  11.  The  Jews  sought  to  kill 
him.  John  7:  1.  They  hated  and  persecuted  him.  15:  18 — 25. — 
Tliey  tempted  him.  Luke  22:  28. 

III.  See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  664 — 
666,421. 

IV.  The  death  of  Christ  teas  absolutely  necessary. — Matt.  26: 
39,  42.  "  It  would  have  been  altogether  inconsistent  with  the 
character  of  the  all-wise  God  to  expose  his  Son  to  such  sufferings, 
if  the  object  for  which  he  died  could  possibly  have  been  otherwise 
attained.  But  this  absolute  necessity  makes  the  death  of  Jesus 
harmonize  with  the  character  of  God  in  accomplishing  its  grand 
object,  whilst  it,  at  the  same  time,  produces  many  other  good 
effects  which  might  indeed  have  been  brought  about  in  a  less  pain- 
ful way."^ 

V.  John  10:  17.  14:  31.  18:  11.  Heb.  10:  7—10.  comp.  «5 
88.  111.  5. 

VI.  Remission  of  sins ,  is  the  ^r and  object  of  Chris  fs  death.- 
Matt.  26:  28.  Ephes.  1:  7.  Heb.  9:  15,  eig  aqeacv  d^iuQitMv  (jia- 
QOLTiTOifioLioiv) — tig  dnoXvTQWGiv  I  tof  TiuQa^uotwv,  *' For  deliver- 
ance from  the  punishment  of  sins."  The  "  deliverance  from  trans- 
gressions" spoken  of  (Heb.  9:  15,)  cannot  possibly,  in  this  place, 
mean  deliverance  from  the  slavery  of  sin,  or  reformation  ;  for  the 

1  The  Design  of  Christ's  death^  p.  442, 


^  89.]  EFFECTS  OF  CHRISt's  DEATH.  451 

passage  treats  of  allaying  the  remorse  of  conscience  for  past  sins, 
and  not  for  such  as  are  present  or  future.  And  it,  moreover,  refers 
to  such  a  redemption  or  deliverance  as  could  not  be  expected  from 
the  Levitical  sin-ofFerings,  which  aimed  at  the  remission  of  external 
transgressions.^  And  that  this  is  the  signification  of  aqeatg  d^agtiwv 
also  in  Matt.  26:  28,  has  been  proved  by  Siiskind,  in  his  dissertation 
entitled,  Does  the  remission  of  sins,  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, signify  deliverance  from  punishment  ?^ 

VII.  Christ's  death  delivers  us  from  all  future  evil. — It  delivers 
us  from  all  future  punishments  (Rom.  5:  9,)  whether  they  are  the 
mere  consequences  of  the  sin  and  punishment  of  Adam,  as  would  be 
the  case  with  children  who  die  in  their  infancy  if  no  redemption  had 
been  provided  (*§>  57  ;)  or  are  the  effects  of  our  own  personal  guilt. 
Rom.  5:  16,  the  free  gift  is  of  many  offences  unto  justification.  Col. 
2:  13,  having  forgiven  you  all  trespasses.  Tit.  2:  14,  that  he  might 
redeem  us  from  all  iniquity.  See  LXX.  Psalm  130:  8,  3,  where 
this  same  phrase  is  used  to  express  forgiveness  of  sin.  1  John  1:  7, 
9,  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin.  Every  one 
that  believeth  is  justified  from  all  his  sins  through  Jesus  Christ. — 
Acts  13:  38.  But  that,  even  in  the  case  first  mentioned,  the  evil 
might  justly  be  called  a  punishment,  though  it  would  not  be  the 
effect  of  the  guilt  of  the  individual  suffering  it,^  is  proved  in  the  work 
on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  585.  ^  57.  111.  1.  Nay, 
even  those  punishments  to  which  an  individual  who  did  not  die  un- 
converted, exposed  himself  by  his  sins  committed  previously  to  his 
reformation  or  during  his  religious  life,  would,  if  no  atonement  had 
been  made,  still  befall  him  in  part  {§  57,  56,)  in  consequence  of 
Adam's  transgression  and  the  natural  punishment  of  it,  that  is,  in 
consequence  of  the  sinful  propensities  of  our  nature,  which  were 
perpetuated  from  our  first  parents  throughout  all  generations,  and 
which  at  least  predispose  us  to  actual  sin.  Our  participation  in  the 
sinful  propensities  of  our  nature,  which  we  derive  from  our  first 
parents  by  natural  generation,  cannot  be  charged  to  us  as  guilt. — 
And  it  is  in  reference  to  this  participation,  which  was  not  caused  by 
any  guilt  in  us,  that  the  mercy  of  God  (^  59,  92,)  which  provided 
for  us  redemption  from  the  evil  effects  of  foreign  sin,  from  the  effects 
of  the  sin  of  Adam,  was  extended  also  to  those  deserved  punish- 
ments which  are  the  result  of  our  own  personal  guilt.  We  may 
admit  what  has  been  contended  for,  that  God  does  not  require  of 
frail,  imperfect  man,  such  a  perfect  conformity  of  life  and  mmd  to 
the  divine  law  as  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  yield,  and  that  he  does 


1  Comment,  on  Heb.  in  loc.  note  b. 

a  Flatfs  Mag.  No.  3,  p.  190—223.  No  4,  p.  76—178. 

3  Mauchart'8  Repertorium  fur  Empirische  Psychol.  Vol.  II.  p.  153. 


452  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK. 


IV. 


not  denounce  punishment  upon  them  for  not  being  more  perfect  than 
it  was  possible  for  them  to  be.  But  on  the  other  hand,  even  if 
frail  and  sinful  creatures  had  done  every  thing  which  it  was  possible 
for  them  to  do,  with  their  depraved  nature,  they  still  could  not  ex- 
pect as  pure  and  elevated  a  happiness,  as  if  their  nature  had  been 
unpolluted  by  sin  and  they  had  made  important  advances  in  holi- 
ness and  perfection.  This  disadvantage,  under  which  they  would 
labour,  ^^'ould  still  be  the  consequence  of  their  inherited  depravity 
of  nature  amd  of  the  sin  of  Adam,  who  by  an  act  of  real  guilt, 
which  he  might  have  avoided,  entailed  a  ruined  nature  upon  him- 
self, and  his  posterity.  This  disadvantage  would  be  the  natural 
punishment  of  Adam's  transgression.  But  as  Christ,  the  Second 
Father  of  the  human  family  (<^  59,)  delivered  us  from  the  punish- 
ment of  the  disobedience  of  the  first  father  of  the  race  of  man,  by 
assuming  it  himself,  and  has  given  us  a  title  to  a  salvation  which 
even  the  best  of  Adam's  sinful  posterity  would  have  had  no  right  to 
expect ;  we  may,  even  in  this  respect,  say  that  Christ  bore  our 
punishment,  the  punishment  due  to  the  whole  human  family  (John 
1:  29.  1  Tim.  2:  6.  Heb.  2:  9.  ;)  inasmuch  as  the  punishment  in 
which  an  individual  participates,  may  also  be  called  his  punishment 
(<§»  57.  III.  1.)  But  as  Jesus  also  liberated  us  from  the  punishment 
of  our  own  personal  transgressions,  which,  though  our  natural  de- 
pravity disposed  us  to  commit  them,  we  nevertheless  could  and 
ought  ("§>  56,  57)  to  have  avoided,  we  can  say  with  truth,  in  the 
most  rigid  sense  of  the  terms,  that  J^us  bore  our  sins,  was  punished 
in  the  stead  of  us  guilty  sinners,  on  account  of  our  sins.  Is,  53:  5 
—12.  1  Pet.  2:  24.  3:  18.  Gal.  1:  4.  Rom.  5:  6—8.  4:  25.  1 
Cor.  15:  3. 

VIII.  Subject  continued. — The  punishments  which  were  re- 
moved by  the  atoning  death  of  Christ,  properly  belong  to  the  in- 
visible world;  they  are  future  punishments  (1  Thess.  1:  10,)  the 
opposite  of  which,  according  to  the  Scripture  representation,  is 
eternal  life,  the  everlasting  inheritance.  John  3:  14 — 16.  Heb.  9: 
15.  Hence,  it  is  not  surprising,  that  the  death  of  Christ  did  not 
obviate  the  temporal  consequences  of  sin.  Rom.  8:  10,  18 — 23. — 
Nevertheless,  the  death  of  Christ  did  divest  the  temporal  effects  of 
sin  of  their  punitive  disgrace  and  terror.  They  are  no  longer  of  a 
punitive  nature.  The  friends  of  Christ  are  no  longer  exposed  to 
any  punishment.  Rom.  8:  1,  ovdiif  xaicixgtfAa  To7g  h  Xqigx^ 
'Irjoov  there  is  now  no  condemnation  to  them  which  are  in  Christ 
Jesus.  Death  is  to  them  no  longer  an  evidence  of  the  divine  dis- 
pleasure, but  is  to  be  regarded  by  them  as  the  transition  of  their 
spirit  to  real  life.  Nor  are  their  temporal  afflictions  to  be  viewed 
as  judicial  dispensations  (Rom.  5:  1,)  but  as  evidence  of  the  pater- 
nal disposition  of  God  (v.  3.)     Joyful  indeed  are  the  prospects 


§90.]  SALVATION  NOT  BY  WORKS.  453 


which  futurity  presents  to  their  view.  In  the  sight  of  God,  they 
are  even  now  citizens  of  the  empire  of  God,  and,  as  far  as  their 
circumstances  will  admit,  are  treated  as  such. 

IX.  Subject  continued. — Heb.  2:  14  etc,  iva  dnakXa^f]  Tovzovg, 
oaot  (fo^at  {^avdiov  did  navzog  tov  ^rjp  I'tfoxot  tjaav  dovldug  "  in 
i order  that,  by  his  death,  he  might  deliver  those  who  had  been  all 
their  life  in  a  slavish  fear  of  death,  from  that  fear." 


SECTION   XC. 


TTie  atonement  is  the  immediate  cause  of  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
is  not  dependant  on  our  reformation  for  its  efficacy. 

'  The  instructions  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  must  not  be  explained 
so  as  to  mean  that  the  death  of  Christ  may  be  a  motive  to  induce 
us  to  obey  his  injunctions  and  fulfil  our  duties,  in  short,  may  be  a 
motive  to  such  a  habit  of  thought  and  course  of  conduct  as  will 
procure  the  remission  of  our  sins.  Such  an  explanation  is  altogether 
groundless,  inasmuch  as  no  such  representation  of  the  influence  of 
Christ's  death  is  expressly  given  in  a  single  text  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.(l)  On  the  contrary,  our  obligation  to  piety  is  derived  as  a 
CQnsequence(2)  from  the  antecedent  blessing.  But  this  represen- 
tation, moreover,  expressly  contradicts  the  doctrines  of  Christianity. 
For  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  declare,  most  explicitly,  that 
the  good  works  of  men  have  not  the  least  meritorious  influence  in 
procuring  the  remission  of  our]sins.(3)  Nay,  so  emphatic  is  the 
language  used  by  the  inspired  penmen  on  this  subject,  that  they 
declare  that  if  our  own  works  were  the  meritorious  cause  of  our 
salvation,  then  was  the  death  of  Christ  superfluous.  Gal.  2:21, 
h  did  vofiov  dixatoavvT],  dga  Xgiaiog  dcogedv  dn6&ave.(4)  More- 
over, the  New  Testament  teaches  us,  that  Christ,  by  his  death, 
purchased  the  right  of  the  remission  of  sins,  and  eternal  felicity  for 
all  men  (<§>  66  etc.)  even  for  those  who  do  not  reform,  and  for 
those  who  in  this  world  have  not  enjoyed  the  knowledge  of  a  Sa- 
viour, and  to  whom,  therefore,  the  death  of  Christ  could  not  be  a 
motive  to  virtue.(5) 


454  or  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV, 


Illustrations. 

I.  The  atonement  is  the  immediate  cause  of  the  remission  of 
our  sins. — If  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  had  regarded  the 
death  of  Christ  merely  as  a  motive  to  reformation,  and  that  as  the 
cause  of  remission  ;  they  would  rather,  in  this  mediate  sense,  have 
derived  our  salvation  from  the  resurrection  than  from  the  death  of 
Christ.  There  is,  indeed,  a  connexion  between  the  death  of  Jesus 
and  our  reformation.  It  affords  us  an  example  of  obedience  to  God, 
of  faith,  of  patience,  of  confidence  in  the  divine  preservation,  and 
of  the  most  exalted  love.  It  proves  to  us,  moreover,  his  firm  con- 
viction of  the  truth  of  his  doctrines,  and  thus  affords  us  a  confirma- 
tion of  them,  and  a  motive  to  their  reception,  and  a  consequent 
reformation.  But  it  is  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  in  which  we  see 
the  happy  reward  of  his  obedience  unto  death,  which  possesses  pe- 
culiar power  (compare  ^  83.  111.  G.)  This  also  affords  us  the  most 
decided  evidence  of  the  truth  of  those  views  with  which  Jesus  died. 
Hence,  it  would  have  been  natural  for  the  writers  of  the  New 
Testament  to  represent  the  resurrection,  rather  than  the  death  of 
Jesus,  as  a  motive  to  reformation,  as  the  mediate  cause  of  remission 
of  sins  and  of  eternal  life  ;  especially  as  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
necessarily  presupposes  his  death,  but  his  death  by  no  means  im- 
plies his  resurrection.  But  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  when  speaking 
of  the  ground  or  cause  of  pardon  and  of  future  blessedness,  either 
mention  the  death  of  Christ  alone,  or  they  connect  the  death  and 
resurrection  together,  but  never  do  they  mention  the  resurrection 
alone. 

II.  Same  subject  continued. — In  <^  4  of  the  work  just  cited  in 
the  margin,  it  is  proved  that  all  the  passages  in  the  New  Testament- 
which  belong  to  this  subject,  either  represent  pardon,  and  not  re- 
formation, as  the  immediate  object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  or  they 
derived  the  obligation  to  reformation  and  to  a  christian  life  from  the 
pardon  which  the  death  of  Christ  procured.  To  the  first  class  be- 
long the  following  passages,  in  which,  according  to  the  more  correct 
explanation,  pardon,  and  not  a  change  of  life,  is  represented  as  the 
object  of  Christ's  death.  2  Cor.  5:  19,  {^sog  ^v  iv  Xqigtm  xoofiov 
xazuXXaaacov  tavifo  God  was,  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  unto 
himself  (comp.  v.  18.)  The  clause  "  not  imputing  their  trespasses 
unto  them"  proves  the  signification  of  the  passage  to  be  "  God 
graciously  restored  the  world  to  his  favour."  This  interpretation  is 
just  as  much  authorized  on  philological  grounds  (Matt.  5:  24.  1 
Sam.  29:  4 ;  see  LXX,)  as  the  explanation,  "  God  reconciled  the 
affections  and  dispositions  of  the  world  to  himself,"  which  is,  moie- 
over,  not  true  in  fact.     In  Rom.  5:  10,  the  words  xuTrj^'^dyrjfiiv  tw 


§  90.]  DESIGN  OF  Christ's  death.  455 

t^fw  8ta  xov  Oavdiov  tov  vlov  dviov — yiavalXoiyivTeQ  we  were  recon- 
ciled to  God  by  the  death  of  his  Son,  correspond  to  v.  9,  dtxai(o&' 
evieg  h  ko  aifAart  aviov  being  justified  by  his  blood  ;  and  therefore, 
like  the  latter  words,  they  refer  to  pardon,  and  not  to  refornriation. 
And  in  Eph.  2:  16,  the  same  expression  dnonaiaXka^r]  tw  detS 
reconcile  unto  God,  is  explained  by  the  words  "  through  him  we 
I  have  access  unto  the  Father ;"  and  therefore  refers  to  our  restora- 
tion to  the  favour  of  God,  to  our  pardon.^ 

In  the  following  passages,  reformation  is  derived  from  pardon,  and 
consequently  represented  as  a  mediate  object  of  the  death  of  Christ. 
Tit.  2:  14,  that  he  might  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people 
zealous  of  good  works.  (Comp.  v.  11,  the  grace  of  God  which 
bringeth  salvation,  i.  e.  the  saving  grace  of  God  hath  appeared  to 
all  men,  teaching  etc.  Comp.  also  the  words  immediately  preceding 
\'va  Ivigmanxav  i^fidg  dno  ndai^g  diofilag  that  he  might  redeem  us 
from  all  iniquity ;  by  which  words  remission  of  sins  is  expressed  in 
the  130th  Psalm  8th  verse.)  2  Cor.  5:  14,  15.  1  Cor.  6:  20.— 
Ephes.  2:  10,  xiia&ivieg  tv  Xqlotm  'Jr^oov,  ini  tgyotg  dya&o7g 
"  we  are  made  new  creatures  through  Christ  {^  73.  111.  1 ,)  that  we 
should  live  in  accordance  with  this  new  and  exalted  destination."  1 
Pet.  1 :  17,  pass  the  time  of  your  sojourning,  in  the  fear  of  the 
Lord,  knowing  that  ye  were  not  redeemed  with  corruptible  things 
|etc.  Heb.  9:  14,  how  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  Cjirist — purge 
your  conscience  from  dead  works,  to  serve  the  living  God.  A 
reception  among  the  people  of  God,  ought  to  excite  Christians  to 
[live  in  a  manner  worthy  of  the  privileges  of  this  people  of  God. 

III.  See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  <^  3.  Comp. 
§  73  supra. 

IV.  Explanation  o/Gal.  2:  21. — In  the  work  on  the  Design  of 
Christ's  death,  <5>  6,  the  context  of  this  passage  is  examined,  and  the 
isense  of  the  words  ei  did  vofiov  dtxaioavvr}  (i.  q.  dacalwatg  i^  I'^ywv 

vofAOv)  "  If  righteousness  is  by  the  law,"  is  proved  to  be  this  :  "  If 
the  fulfilment  of  the  expectations  which  the  law  authorizes  those  to 

I  entertain,  who  fulfil  all  its  requisitions  (3:  10,)  could  be  expected 
from  the  law,  L  e.  from  our  own  performance  of  the  condition  pre- 

f  scribed  by  the  law,  then  did  Christ  die  in  vain."  (p.  440 — 450.) 

V.  The  atonement  is  general — The  passages  which  prove  this, 
are  stated   in  <§>   QQ.  111.    2.     "  The   atonement   or  reconciliation 

'  effected  by  the  death  of  Christ  is  universal,  although  the  reforma- 
i  tion  which  is  effected  by  the  Gospel  and  doctrine  of  atonement  is 
I  by  no  means  general."     See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  Christ's 

death,  <5.  2. 

r   In  refutation  of  the  position,  that   "■  the  death  of  Christ  makes 


See  Schwartz  on  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  28  etc. 


456  OF  THE  REDEEMER.       ,  [bK.  IV. 

reconciliation  between  God  and  us,  only  through  the  intervention 
of  our  own  reformation,"  Schwartz,  in  addition  to  the  arguments 
adduced  in  <§>  90,  appeals  to  the  general  usage  of  language,  which 
forbids  the  idea  that  a  mediate  cause  should  be  meant  in  the  propo- 
sition, "  this  was  done  for  the  remission  of  sins."  He  appeals  also 
to  other  forms  of  expression  in  the  New  Testament,  by  which  the 
same  idea  is  expressed,  and  refers  to  the  fact  that  the  death  of 
Christ  is  compared  to  a  sin-ofFering,^  See  <5>  91.  111.  6.  Kant  has 
proved  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  reason,  to  sup- 
pose that  our  own  reformation  and  good  works  are  the  active  or 
efficient  cause  of  the  pardon  of  our  sins.  He  says,  "  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  circumstances  under  which  the  sinner  began  his 
course  of  piety,  and  however  uniformly  correct  his  deportment  may 
be,  still,  previously  to  his  change  he  lived  in  sin,  and  the  guilt  then 
contracted  he  cannot  possibly  ever  wash  away.  The  fact,  that  he, 
after  his  change  of  heart,  contracts  no  new  debts,  will  never  pay  off 
the  old  ones.  Nor  can  he,  however  holy  his  walk,  ever  do  more 
than  he  is  bound  to  do ;  for  he  is  under  constant  obligation  to  exert 
himself  to  the  utmost  of  his  ability  in  the  service  of  his  God."^ 


SECTION  XCI. 

According  to  the  New  Testament,  deliverance  from  the  punishment 
of  sin  is  the  immediate  object  of  the  death  of  Christ — Christ 
suffered  as  our  substitute. 

The  instructions  of  the  New  Testament,  on  the  subject  of  the 
connexion  between  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  remission  of  sins, 
cannot  be  construed  in  any  other  than  the  following  manner : 
Christ  submitted  to  sufferings  and  death, (1)  in  the  place  of  guilty 
man(2)  and  on  account  of  his  sins  ;(3)  so  that,  in  consequence  of 
his  suffering  the  pains  of  death (4)  on  account  of  our  sins,  we  are 
exempted  from  the  necessity  of  enduring  the  punishment  of  our 
transgressions,  just  as  though  w^e  had   ourselves  already  endured  it. 

1  Staiidlin  on  the  design  and  influence  of  the  Atonement;  and  Ewald's 
Monthly  Magazine  for  1802,  No.  4.  p.  241—249. 

2  Religionslehre,  S.  78.  Compare  Tieftrunk's  Censur  des  protestantischen 
LehrbegrifTs,  Th.  II,  S.  161.  See  also  his  Dissertation,  in  Staudlin's  Beitragen, 
Vol.  III.  p.  121,  139,  151.  and  Ewald  sup.  cit.  p.  242. 


§91.]  CHRIST  OUR  SUBSTITUTE.  457 

(5)  In  short,  Christ  suffered  the  penalty  of  the  law  on  our  ac- 
count and  as  our  substituie,(6)  and  thus  reconciled  us  to  God  the 
Judge,(7)  so  that  those  apprehensions(8)  concerning  the  pardon  of 
the  transgressor, (9)  are  now  removed,  which  would  suggest  them- 
selves when  he  recollected  the  holiness  of  the  divine  law  and  its 
denunciations  against  the  sinner.  Now  the  sinner  can  be  pardoned 
I  without  any  violence  being  offered  to  the  authority  of  the  law  ;(10) 
for  its  demands  are  satisfied, (11)  and  his  pardon  is  in  perfect  ac- 
cordance with  justice. (12)  And  certainly  the  origin  of  this  doctrine 
is  not  to  be  sought  in  any  supposed  accommodation,  on  the  part  of 
I  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  to  the  current  opinion  of  his  contemporaries. 
(13)  For,  if  there  be  a  single  doctrine  among  those  taught  by  the 
apostles,  which  can  be  considered  divine,  it  must  certainly  be  the 
doctrine  of  the  remission  of  sins  through  the  death  of  Jesus ;  for, 
this  must  be  classed  among  those  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christian- 
ity,(l4)  which  are  derived  from  God  himself  and  his  good  Spirit. (15) 

Illustrations. 

I.  1  Pet.  3:  18,  for  Christ  suffered  for  sins,  the  just  for  the  un- 
just. In  the  work  on  the  Design  etc.  it  is  remarked,  that  an  inno- 
cent person's  suffering  on  account  of  sin,  for  the  sake  of  the  guilty, 
cannot  well  be  supposed  to  mean  any  thing  else  than  that  he  suffer- 
ed the  punishment  due  to  the  guilty. 

II.  Christ  was  our  substitute. — Rom.  5:  6,  for  the  ungodly  ;  v. 
7,  8,  when  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us. 

III.  It  was  for  our  sins  that  Christ  died. — Rom.  4:  25,  he  was 
delivered  for  our  offences.  1  Cor.  15:  3,  Christ  died  for  our  sins. 
Gal.  1:4,  who  gave  himself  for  our  sins;  and  Is.  53:  5,  l^'^yiTBtt  bbha 
=i3''ni3i5'»  M^t}^  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  bruised  for 
our  iniquities.  'On  this  passage  the  reader  may  consult  the  work 
on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Christ  (p.  475,)  where  some  ob- 
servations are  made  on  the  hypothesis,  that  this  passage  refers  to 
Hezekiah,  or  to  the  Jewish  people  in  general,  or  to  some  particular 
part  of  it.  Beck,  in  his  Comment,  histor.  decretorum  relig.  Chris- 
tianae,  p.  76,  gives  an  account  of  the  various  recent  works  on  Is.  ch. 
53. 

IV.  Matt.  20:  28,  the  Son  of  man  came  to  give  his  life  a  ran- 
som, IvTQov  for  many.  1  Tim.  2:  6,  who  gave  himself  a  ransom 
for  all.  The  words  Xvtqov,  avtiXvigov,  a  ransom,  always  indicate  an 
immediate  connexion  of  causation  between  the  intended  deliverance 

58 


458  <  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

and  the  object  called  Xuigov  or  ransom,  i.  e.  they  always  signify 
the  proper  and  real  causation  or  production  of  deliverance. 

V.  Subject  continued. — 2  Cor.  5:  15,  ii  elg  vntg  nuvxtav  ant&a- 
viVj  aga  ol  navifgdntftapov  "  Since  one  died  as  the  substitute  of  all', 
all  must  be  considered  as  having  died."  (Compare  yeyovf  Rom.  2: 
25,  which  is  equivalent  to  XoyiO'&tjoeiat  v.  26.)  On  the  context  of 
tiiis  whole  passage,  the  reader  may  consult  the  work  on  the  Design 
of  the  atonement.  Rom.  6:  2,  far  be  it  from  us  :  for  we  are  dead 
to  sin.  v.  5,  we  have  been  planted  together  (with  him)  in  the  like- 
ness of  his  death,  v.  7,  our  old  man  is  crucified  with  (him.)  v.  8, — • 
we  are  dead  with  Christ,  v.  11,  consider  yourselves  dead  unto  sin. 
7:  4,  ye  are  become  dead  to  the  law  through  the  body  of  Christ,  v. 
6,  we  are  delivered  from  the  law,  being  dead.  In  illustration  of 
these  passages  let  the  reader  attend  to  the  following  remarks  : — 1. 
Those  who  embraced  Christianity,,  at  the  same  time  entered  into 
the  closest  union  with  Christ  (Gal.  3:  27,)  and  with  his  death, 
avftqvTOL  Tw  Xgiario. — 2.  The  words  ouioj  nal  thus  also,  in  Rom. 
6:  11,  evidently  show,  Gal.  3:  10,  that  according  to  the  opinion  of 
the  apostlcj  the  Romans  ought  to  regard  themselves  as  "  dead  unto 
sin"  [as  having  been  dead  in  regard  to  sin,  comp.  Col.  2:  13,]  in 
the  same  sense  in  which  it  is  said  of  Christ  *'  dntiyavi  irj  dfAagxla^ 
i.  e.  he  died  on  account  of  sin." — 3.  The  design  of  Paul  in  Rom. 
6:  1  etc,  is,  to  prove  that  the  doctrine  relative  to  grace,  which  he 
had  proposed  in  the  preceding  chapters,  aftbrded  no  license  for  sin. 
But  this  he  would  not  have  proved,  if  the  2d  verse  be  rendered 
thus :  *'  and — shall  we  live  in  sin  who  are  to  die  unto  sin  ?"  Oa 
the  contrary,  he  answers  the  objection  in  v.  1,  from  the  doctrine  of 
grace  [or  gracious  remission  of  sins]  itself.  H"e  says,  "  The  reason 
why  punishment  was  executed  through  the  crucifixion  of  Christ  on 
us  or  on  "  our  old  man"  is  that,  in  the  very  means  of  our  salvation, 
we  should  recognize  the  law  which  denounces  punishment  on  the 
sinner,  so  that  now,  we,  being  already  punished  according  to  this 
law  (Gal.  2:  19,  being  dead  by  the  law,)  should  the  more  certainly 
no  longer  be  the  servants  of  sin." — 4.  When  the  apostle  Paul  ex- 
presses the  admonition,  not  to  live  any  longer  in  sin,  by  the  figure 
of  dying,  he  does  not  say  '' dmOuveif,'"  but  in  the  imperative 
(Rom.  6:  13,)  -nagaaTtiaars  lauiovg  etc.  yield  yourselves  unto 
God  as  those  who  are  alive  from  the  dead.  Col.  3:  5,  mortify 
your  members.  On  the  contrary,  lie  deduces  the  duty  to  die  unto 
sin,  from  the  position,  that  Christians  did  die  with  Christ,  and  are 
transferred  with  him  into  a  blessed  new  life,  for  which  the  service 
of  sin  is  not  at  all  suited.  Thus  Col.  3:  5,  ovv  compared  with  v.  1 
— 9.  Rom.  8:  3.  This  same  proposition,  that  Christians  have 
died  with  Christ,  is  also  taught  in  the  following  passages :  1  Pet. 


§  91.]  CHRIST  OUR  SUBSTITUTE.  459 

2:  24 ;  "  So  that  we,  as  those  who  have  died  on  account  of  sin 
(because  as  was  nnentioned  just  before,  our  sins  were  punished  in 
Christ  on  the  cross,)  should  now  (guard  against  sin  and)  live  unto 
righteousness."  4:  1,  he  that  suffered  in  his  mortal  body,  is  free 
from  sin.  Or  in  other  words,  "  as  we  have  already  endured  th« 
punishment  of  sin,  in  the  death  of  Christ,  we  are  free  from  sin;  no 
one  can  any  longer  reproach  us  on  account  of  our  past  sins.  But  the 
punishment  which  was  endured,  has  rendered  sin  odious  to  us  for 
the  future.  Gal.  2:  19,  di<x  vofiov  vofico  untOavov — Xqioko  avve- 
CTavgcofAuc  "  Inasmuch  as  Christ  was,  through  the  (denunciation  of 
the)  lawj  punished  in  our  stead  by  the  death  of  the  cross,  and  I  was 
thus  through  the  law,  crucified  with  Christ,  I  am  therefore  free 
from  the  law."  Rom.  8:  3,  4,  o  &i6g  xaitxgivs  ttJp  dfiagriav  ii>  ry 
cagyd  (viz.  avtov,  tou  vlob  lov  &sov)  I'va  to  dixaio)fAa  jov  vOfAOv 
7ikr]g(6^TJ  iv  -n^lv.  "  He  punished  sin  in  human  nature  (i.  e.  in  the 
human  nature  of  the  Son  of  God,  which  resembled  our  sinful  nature,) 
in  order  that  the  declaration  of  the  law  which  required  that  man 
(human  nature)  should  be  punished  (1:32.  Gal.  3;  10,)  should  be 
fulfilled  in  us,  and  we  consequently  be  no  more  exposed  to  punish- 
ment." The  death  of  Christ  was  undoubtedly  a  penal  suffering,  a 
punishment  of  the  law,  inasmuch  as  God  brought  about  his  death. 

VI.  The  sufferings  of  Christ  were  vicarious. — Gai.  3:  13, 
**  In  our  stead  Christ  endured  the  punishment  which  is  denounced 
by  the  law  and  proves  the  earnestness  of  the  lawgiver"  [ysvofievog 
vneg  ri^mv  xara^aj  KUTaga  means  one  who  was  cursed,  condemned 
by  the  lawgiver,  an  object  of  his  displeasure.  Rom.  8:  3,  4,  con- 
demned sin,  nuTiricgipe  df.iagiiuv.  (111.  5.)  Is.  53:  5,  1 1  ejtc.  1  Pet. 
2:  24,  "  Christ  bore  the  punishment  of  our  sins  on  the  cross 
inl  TO  ^vXov  ior  ng^fidf-itvog  ini  to  ^vXop.)  John  1:29,  "Behold 
the  Lamb  consecrated  to  God  [the  sacrificial  lamb,]  which  will  suffer 
the  punishment  of  the  sins  of  the  world  (ai'poji/  for  ^tklwp  ai'gsiv;) 
or  which  takes  upon  itself  the  punishment  of  the  sins  of  the  world." 
The  reader  may  consult  the  author's  Grammatical  Observations  on 
this  text,  in  Flatt's  Magazine,  where  this  exposition  is  defended 
against  another,  which  makes  these  words  mean  *'  taketh  away  the 
sins  etc."  1  John  3:  5,  "  Christ  made  his  appearance  (on  earth) 
in  order  to  suffer  the  punishment  of  our  sins."  Hence  in  him  was 
no  sin,  and  consequently,  if  we  wish  to  live  in  union  with  him,  we 
cannot  live  in  sin.  Heb.  9:  28,  ''Christ  was  offered  once  for  all, 
to  endure-the  punishment  of  the  sins  of  many."  Compare  Is.  53: 
11  (LXX,)  Tag  dfiugTiug  auTMv  amog  aVo/W*  which,  according  to 
V.  5,  can  signify  nothing  else  than  "  he  sufl'ers  on  account  of  their 
sins,  suffers  the  punishment  of  their  sins."  v.  4.  It  is  this  same 
idea  (that  Jesus  suffered  the  punishment  of  our  sins)  on  which  is 
founded  the  comparison  of  Jesus  to  a  sacrifice.     The  passages  refer- 


460  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

ring  to  this  point,  are  the  following :  1  John  2:  2,  he  is  the  propitia- 
tion for  our  sins.  4:  10.  2  Cor.  5:  21,  for  he  (God)  made  him 
(Christ)  to  be  sin  for  us.  Rom.  8:  3,  for  what  the  law  could  not 
do,  because  it  was  weakened  through  the  flesh,  God  sending  his 
own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh  [of  a  sinful  body,]  and  on  ac- 
count of  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  [in  the  human  body  of 
Christ,]  negl  ccfiagi  lag  sc.ngogqoga  which  is  indeed  expressed  in, 
full  in  Heb.  10:  18.  Compare  Lev.  5:  11,  in  the  translation  of  the 
Seventy,  where  the  Hebrew  word  nt^tah  is  rendered  by  negl  d^ag- 
liag.  That  d^agxla  or  "  sin,"  in  2  Cor.  5:  21,  signifies  a  sin-offer- 
ing, is  evident  from  Heb.  9:  28,  where  the  words  "  he  shall  appear 
a  second  time  without  sin"  are  an  antithesis  to  the  words  in  the  26th 
verse,"  he  appeared — by  the  sacrifice  of  himself."^  Rom.  3:  25, 
whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  IXaaTtigiov.  On  the 
word  IXaatrigtov  so.  -tviJia^  the  reader  may  consult  Kypke  Vol.  11. 
p.  161  ;  Krebs  p.  275 ;  Michaehs'  Introd.  N.  T.  «§.29  ;  and  Schleus- 
ner's  Lex.  A  decisive  passage  from  Joseph,  de  Maccab.  «5>  17, 
proves  the  philological  accuracy  of  the  above  sense  of  the  word. — 
In  the  work  on  the  Design  of  Christ's  death  (p.  484,)  I  have  prov- 
ed that  the  word  cannot,  in  this  instance,  signify  "  mercy-seat"  as 
it  generally  does  in  the  version  of  the  Seventy  ;  for  in  this  passage, 
the  death  of  Christ  is  represented  as  the  means  of  our  pardon,  (and 
this  the  mercy-seat  was  not,)  and  God  ns  the  Being  who  bestows 
his  favour.  Heb.  7:  27,  he  offered  himself,  9:  12,  by  his  own 
blood  (in  opposition  to  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats.)  v.  23,  it  was 
necessary  that  the  heavenly  things  themselves  thould  be  purified 
with  better  sacrifices  than  these.  "  The  celestial  sanctuary  needed 
purification  by  a  better  sacrifice,  v.  25,  not  that  he  should  offer 
himself  often,  v.  26,  he  hath  once  appeared  by  the  sacrifice  of  him- 
self, y.  28,  he  was  once  offered.     Compare  10:  5 — 14.  13:  11. 

On  the  subject  of  the  comparison  of  Christ  to  a  sin-offering  and  a 
propitiatory  sacrifice,  we  remark  further  :  the  distinguishing  charac- 
teristic of  the  propitiatory  sacrifice,  was  reconciliation,  or  remission 
of  sins.  And  this  effect  was  not  dependant  on  the  penitent  frame 
of  mind  of  the  person  offering  the  sacrifice,  but  followed  in  conse- 
quence of  the  sacrifice  offered ;  for  who  would  suppose  that  the 
whole  Jewish  people  collected  on  the  great  day  of  atonement  were 
true  penitents  ?  The  victim  was,  in  accordance  with  the  will  of  the 
the  Lawgiver,  placed  in  the  stead  of  the  sinner,  and  punishment 
(though  not  precisely  the  same  which  would  have  been  inflicted  on 
the  sinner,)  was  executed  on  it.     This  vicarious  nature  of  the  pro- 

I  So  the  LXX.  Levit.  4:  21.  Soe  Comm.  on  Heb.  9:  28.  Schleusner's  Lex. 
voc.  afiaQTiano.  11.  In  the  Observv.  it  is  proved,  that  this  signification  of  this 
word  is  acquired  by  a  double  metonymy. 


^  91.]  CHRIST  OUR  SUBSTITUTE.  461 

pitiatory  sacrifice,  was  proposed  to  the  view  of  the  people  in  a  very- 
clear  light  by  the  solemnities  of  the  great  day  of  atonement,  with 
which  the  great  Sacrifice  of  Christ  is  compared  Heb.  9:  7 — 10,  20. 
And  that  the  tertium  comparationis  [or  the  point  of  similarity  and 
comparison]  between  the  Jewish  sacrifices  and  the  death  of  Christ, 
really  consists  in  the  pardon  of  sins  effected  by  the  vicarious  suf- 
fering of  punishment,  is  evident,  because  this  is  expressly  stated  as 
the  point  of  comparison  in  Heb.  9:  26,  24.  10:  18,  and  because  in 
some  passages  this  vicarious  efficacy  is  attributed  to  the  death  of 
Christ,  without  any  figure  or  comparison.  Gal.  3:  13.  2:  19.  As 
to  the  object  of  the  Jewish  sacrifices,  the  sins  of  which  they  pro- 
cured remission  were  of  a  civil  or  ceremonial  nature.  The  ex- 
clusion of  the  individual  bringing  the  offering,  from  the  outward 
people  of  God,  and  from  the  outward  privileges  of  this  people,  was 
thus  removed.  But  by  the  atonement  of  Christ,  forgiveness  of  sins 
was  wrought  in  regard  to  the  conscience  (Heb.  9:  14,)  which  has  a 
reference  to  the  future  judgment ;  that  is,  the  remission  of  future 
punishments  was  effected.  Our  exclusion  from  the  blessed  part  of 
the  invisible  world  of  Spirits  (Hades)  and  from  heaven  was  prevent- 
ed. 

The  signification  of  the  word  '*  punishment,"  in  the  proposition, 
"  Christ  suffered  the  punishment  of  our  sins,"  is  explained  in  the 
work  on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Christ.  When  substitution  is 
spoken  of,  it  is  of  course  not  meant  that  the  punishments  are  merit- 
ed by  the  substitute  himself.  Vicarious  punishment  is  a  punish- 
ment endured  on  condition  that  the  individual  who  would  otherwise 
have  been  exposed  to  it,  shall  be  released ;  or  it  is  a  punishment 
endured  in  consequence  of  a  judicial  decree,  because  some  other 
person  was  to  have  been  punished.  It  is,  therefore,  not  necessary 
that  it  should  be  the  very  same  punishment  which  the  criminal 
must  otherwise  have  endured.  The  inexorable  justice  of  God,  de- 
manded of  Jesus,  that  before  his  desire  of  delivering  mankind  from 
punishment  could  be  gratified,  he  must  first  submit  to  such  miseries 
and  punishments  as  sinners  alone  endured.  The  guilt  of  Adam 
and  the  guilt  of  his  descendants,  could  not  indeed  be  transferred  to 
Jesus.  Still  the  sufferings  which  he  endured  may  have  been  im- 
posed on  him  (and  thus  far  be  considered  punishments)  in  order  to 
declare,  that  the  punishment  which  awaited  us  sinners,  who  were 
not  only  unworthy  of  the  happiness  intended  for  us,  but  who  ac- 
tually deserved  damnation,  must  be  regarded  as  a  serious  impedi- 
ment to  our  obtaining  that  salvation  which  the  Redeemer  designed 
by  his  obedience  to  purchase  the  right  of  bestowing  on  us  ;  and  that 
this  impediment  is  as  assuredly  removed  as  the  Redeemer  endured 
the  most  painful  sufferings."^     In  Reinhard's  Dogmatik,  the  phrase 

I  Annotat.  ad  Kantii  pliilosoph.  p.  IG. 


462  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

"  vicarious  death  of  Christ"  is  explained  to  be  "  a  death  which 
Christ  resolved  to  submit  to,  because  God  had  purposed,  in  con- 
sideration of  it,  to  remit  to  man  the  punishments  of  bis  crimes."^ 
And  the  word  "  satisfaction  (atonement")  is  by  the  same  writer  de- 
fined to  mean  *' all  that  Christ  did  and  suffered,  to  avert  from  us 
the  punishment  of  our  sins  ;"^  or  that  Christ  by  his  death  had  per- 
formed the  condition  on  which  God  had  determined  to  pardon  sin.^ 

Christ  is  called  our  Priest,  or  Highpriest,  in  several  passages  of 
Hebrews,  because  he  bore  his  blood  as  the  blood  of  a  sacrifice  into 
heaven ;  that  is,  because  after  he  had  laid  down  his  life  as  a  sacri- 
fice for  our  sins,  he  entered  on  the  enjoyment  of  a  glorious  happi- 
ness with  God  in  heaven  ;  he  is  so  termed,  to  show  that  he  really 
procured  the  remission  of  our  sins  by  his  death.  "  Highpriest— 
to  make  reconciliation  for  the  sins  of  the  people — we  are  sanctified 
through  the  offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  once — and  every 
priest  standeth  daily  ministering.^  Heb.  2:  17.  10:  10,  11.  He  is 
our  Highpriest,  inasmuch  as  in  virtue  of  his  death,  which  he  en- 
dured out  of  obedience  to  God,  he  possesses  a  divine  (Heb.  5:  4 — 
6)  and  to  us  a  salutary  dignity.     Heb.  5:  9.  7.  24,  25. 

Vn.  Christ^s  death  reconciled  us  to  God. — Eph.  2:  16.  Rom. 
5:  10.  Compare  <§>  90.  111.  2.  The  proposition,  "  Jesus  by  his 
death  reconciled  God  to  man,"  must  not  be  supposed  to  mean,  that 
God  was  induced  to  feel  a  compassion  for  man,  only  after  Jesus 
had  satisfied  the  demands  of  the  violated  law,  by  suffering  the  pun- 
ishment it  prescribed.  For,  a  judge  who  is  possessed  of  a  truly 
compassionate  heart,  may  inflict  punishment  on  an  offender,  out  of 
love  to  the  law  and  to  the  general  welfare  of  society  ;  or,  as  it  is 
sometimes  expressed,  according  to  the  usus  loquendi  of  Scripture, 
*'  he  may  be  angry."  See  *§>  24.  111.  8.  He  cannot  be  reconciled 
or  gracious,  or  liberate  the  sinner  from  punishment,  until  the  law  is 
satisfied  and  its  dignity  supported.  Moreover,  it  was  none  othgr 
than  God  himself,  who  devised  the  scheme  by  which  pardon  can  be 
extended  to  the  sinner,  in  consistence  with  the  principles  of  his 
government,  as  is  proved  by  the  following  passages.  John  3:  16. 
1  John  4:  9—11.  Rom.  5:  5 — 8.  8:  32,  he  spared  not  his  own 
Son,  but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all.  2  Cor.  5:  18.  I  Pet.  1:  19, 
the  precious  blood  of  Christ,  as  a  lamb  without  blemish  and  without 
spot,  who  was  foreordained  before  the  foundation  of  the  world. — • 
Heb.  2:  9.     Comp.  <§.  59,  75.  111.  1.     The  death  of  Christ  itself  is 

1  Mors  a  Christo  propterea  suscepta,  quod  Deus  hoininibus  ob  earn  condonare 
decrevit  peccatoruin  poenas. 

2  Complexqs  eoruin  omnium,  quae  Christus  fecit  et  passus  est  ad  avertendas 
a  nobis  peccatorum  poenas.  3  Schwartze  sup.  cit.  p.  50 — 54. 

4  'leQSvi — aQXtSQ^vg,  hence  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  compared  to  the  annual 
propitiatory  sacrifice  of  the  highpriest. 


§91.]  THE  ATONEMENT.  463 

in  many  passages  represented  as  the  most  strinking  evidence  of  the 
grace  and  love  of  God  to  the  human  family.  God  was  reconciled 
to  us  by  the  death  of  Christ.  Not  that  he  was  before  literally 
angry  with  us,  and  would  have  delighted  in  our  destruction;  but 
his  wisdom  found  in  the  death  of  Christ  the  ground  or  cause  on 
account  of  which  he  can  save  the  sinner  from  feeling  the  misery 
consequent  on  the  loss  of  his  favour  without  doing  violence  to  the 
dignity  and  authority  of  his  law.  Hence  we  are  told,  in  2  Cor.  5: 
18,  God  reconciled  us  to  himself  through  Christ,  Kaz«AAaSa*  »?.««? 
iavTMj  that  is,  God  has,  through  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  accomplish- 
ed his  wish  to  extend  pardon  to  the  sinner  in  a  manner  consistent 
with  the  law,  fn]  Xoyl^eaiyuv  ta  nagamoj^aTa,  and  thus  to  indulge 
his  mercy.  Compare  <§>  90.  111.  2. 

VIII.  The  atonement  removes  the  fears  in  reference  to  our 
^pardon,  which  result  from  the  denunciations  of  the  law.  To  the 
laccomplishment  of  this  object  the  atonement  was  peculiarly  well 
^adapted.  For,  although  the  punishment  was  not  inflicted  on  the 
[individual  who  had  incurred  the  guilt,  it  was  nevertheless  required 
-^f  him  who  had  undertake  the  work  of  bestowing  salvation  on 

an,  that  he  should  endure  the  penalty  of  the  law.  And  as  so  ex- 
ted  a  person  (Rom  8:  32)  would  certainly  not  have  taken  the 
unishment  of  the  sinner  on  himself  without  absolute  necessity,  it 
bllows  that  the  liability  of  the  sinner  to  punishment,  must  notwith- 
tanding  the  dignity  of  Jesus,  have  been  a  very  formidable  obstacle 
o  the  extension  of  pardon  (Matt.  26:  42,)  and  consequently  that 
the  holiness  and  authority  of  the  law  (dmaicofAu  tov  vofiov  Rom.  8: 
4.  1:  32.  Gal.  3:  10)  must,  in  the  sight  of  the  Almighty,  be  per- 
fectly inviolable.  Mark  4:  36.  Nor  was  the  punishment  imposed 
311  Jesus,  connected  with  any  injustice  to  himself.  For,  his  most 
iident  wish  was,  to  obtain  the  right  to  pardon  the  sinner  in  con- 
sistence with  the  principles  and  authority  of  the  law.  And,  after 
le  had  suffered  death,  he  received  the  reward  of  his  obedience,  ac- 
cording to  the  law  which  declares  that  obedience  is  entitled  to  re- 
vvard.  The  moral  excellence  of  the  character  of  Jesus  was  display- 
ed in  the  most  splendid  manner,  and  his  glory  thus  advanced.  And 
le  finds  the  most  elevated  happiness  in  restoring  fallen  men  and 
linking  them  possessors  of  eternal  blessedness. 

IX.  7Vie  necessity  of  the  atonement. — This  display  of  the  free 
,^oodness  of  God,  which  could  best  be  made  to  man,  because  of  his 
beculiarly  wretched  situation,  was  as  beneficial,  not  only  to  man, 
!)ut   also  to  the   holy  angels,  as   was  the   proof  of  his  strictness  as. 

Judge,  which  God  gave  in  the  scheme  of  salvation.  1  Pet.  1:  12, 
A'hich  things  (the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  the  glory  that  should 
bllow)  angels  desire  to  look  into.  Ephes.  3:  10.  For,  in  this  last 
loint  of  view,  the  scheme  of  salvation  is  also  important  to  the  an- 


464  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

gels  themselves.  Col.  1:  20,  and  by  him  (having  made  peace 
through  the  blood  of  his  cross)  to  reconcile  all  things  unto  himself, 
whether  things  on  earth  or  things  in  heaven.  Heb.  9:  23,  it  was 
necessary  for  the  heavenly  things  to  be  purified.  "  The  death  of 
Jesus,  being  a  most  solemn  declaration  that  we  deserved  punish- 
ment, is,  at  the  same  time,  an  honourable  testimony  in  favour  of  the 
blessed  spirits  in  heaven,  a  declaration  that  they  are  far  too  pure, 
for  us  to  be  received  into  their  society,  if  Jesus  had  not  prepared  us 
for  admittance  among  them,  by  dehvering  us  from  exposure  to  pun- 
ishment. And  thus  also  did  God  solve  to  them  the  problem,  how 
sinners  could  be  received  into  the  society  of  those  who  had  never 
incurred  any  guilt,  without  contradicting  that  opinion  of  the  inviola- 
ble sanctity  of  the  law  and  the  certain  punishment  of  the  sinner, 
which  is  so  salutary  even  to  the  angels  themselves." 

The  whole  scheme  of  salvation  adopted  by  God,  which  derives 
the  salvation  of  man  from  the  merits  of  Christ,  was  not  indeed 
jiecessary  for  the  sake  of  God  himself;  for  his  own  nature  disposed 
him  to  have  compassion  on  us  (HI.  7.)  But  it  was  necessary  on 
our  account.  This  however  gives  no  sanction  to  that  erroneous 
notion,  that  a  sacrifice  was  necessary  in  order  literally  to  appease 
the  wrath  of  God,  nor  does  it  imply  a  condescension  of  God  to  hu- 
man infirmity,  as  seems  to  be  supposed,  even  by  some  writers  who 
appear  to  entertain  a  reverence  for  the  Holy  Volume,  such  as  Lang 
and  SenfF.^  On  the  contrary,  the  object  was,  to  confirm  the  opinion 
of  the  sanctity  and  inviolability  of  the  holy  law  of  God,  which  de- 
nounces punishment  on  transgression,  and  promises  reward  to  the 
virtuous  ;  an  opinion  true  in  itself,  and  highly  salutary  not  only  to 
man,  but  even  to  the  purest  and  most  exalted  spirits.  For,  to  the 
angels  in  heaven,  the  punishment  thus  inflicted  on  the  Son  of  God 
himself,  must  present  the  most  awful  demonstration  of  the  inviola- 
bility of  the  divine  law,  and  afford  the  strongest  motive  to  constant 
obedience. 

X.  The  authority  of  the  law. — Rom.  3:  31,  do  we  then  make 
void  the  law  through  faith  ?  far  be  it  from  us  !  yea,  we  establish 
the  law. 

X[.  The  law  was  satisfied  by  Christ. — Rom.  8:  3,  4.  Gal.  2: 
10.     See  supra  111.  5. 

XII.  The  Justice  oj  God  was  displayed. — Rom.  3:  25,  26, 
**  God  offered  up  the  Loixl  Jesus  as  a  sacrifice,  for  the  purpose  of 
showing  his  justice  in  that  forgiveness  of  sins  which,  out  of  mercy, 
be  had  In  times  past  extended  to  transgressors,  eig  evdeiliv  z^g 
Si^aioGui/t]g  amovdia  tijp  nagsaiptojv  ngoysyovOTCov  df4.agTrjf.t(XTa)v  ; 
and  also  to  prove  his  justice  in  his  present  dealings ;  in  short,  to 


1  Versuch  uober  die  Herablassung  Gottes,  §  23—34, 


^  91.]  THE  ATONEMENT.  465 

show  that  he  might  be  just  and  still  justify  or  pardon  the  sinner  who 
I  believes  in  Jesus."  A  circumstantial  exposition  of  this  passage  is 
given  in  the  work  on  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  «§>  11.  In  p. 
558,  it  is  remarked,  that  if  Sixaioavvj]  righteousness,  is  translated 
"  goodness,"  as  some  contend  it  ought  to  be,  then  v.  26  would  con- 
tain a  proposition  which  is  partly  contained  in  v.  24,  and  which  is 
so  self  evident  as  not  to  require  being  mentioned  ;  and  that  those 
very  passages  of  the  New  Testament  which  speak  of  the  death  of 
Christ  as  a  punishment  of  the  law,  also  represent  it  as  a  proof  of 
the  divine  justice.     Rom.  8:  4.  Gal.  2:  19.  3:  13. 

An  objection  has  been  urged,  that  vicarious  sufferings  cannot  be 
consistent  with  the  punitive  justice  of  God,  because,  in  order  to  the 
accomplishment  of  the  object  of  the  punishment,  which  is  reforma- 
tion, it  is  necessary  that  the  sinner  should  himself  personally  feel 
the  punishment.     To  this,  it  may  be  replied  : — 1.  that  reformation 
,  is  not  the  only  object  of  the  punishment.     2.  that  part  of  the  ob- 
[  ject  of  the  atonement  which   consisted  in  the  reformation  of  the 
;  sinner,  can  thus  be  accomplished,  just  as  well,  and  even  better,  than 
'  by  the  personal  sufferings  of  the  sinner  himself.     Comp.  <§>  92.  and 
i  111.  8  of  this  section.     Siiskind   and  Seiler  remove  the  objection, 
j  that  the  divine  justice  requires  the  personal  suffering  of  the  sinner 
himself,  in  this  manner  :  "  The  promotion  (say  they)  of  moral  ex- 
jcellence  (the  chief  good,)  is  the  supreme  design  of  God.     Hence, 
if  the  remission  of  sins  is  better  calculated  to  promote  this  supreme 
design  of  God  than    the  actual  infliction  of  the  punishment,  then 
j  remission  of  sins  must  be  consistent  with  the  divine  justice."^  Lang, 
I  in  his  dissertation  on  the  (permanent)  connexion  between  the  death 
I  of  Christ  and  the  pardon  of  sin,  arrives  at  the  following  result,  when 
■  discussing  the  question,  whether  the  pardon  of  sins  is  possible  on 
j  the  principles  of  moral  equity  :  "  The   fear  of  punishment  impairs 
I  our  power,  and  thus  impedes  our  course  toward  holiness,  the  ulti- 
!  mate  object  of  man.     And  yet  reason  require  that  the  punishment 
!  be  executed.     Now,  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ  entirely  removes 
'  the  conflict  between  these   principles.     The  object  of  this  punish- 
[  ment  is  by  actual  fact,  to  display  to  the  world  the  necessary  con- 
I  nexion  between  transgression  and  misery.     The  lively  view  of  this 
!  connexion  in  reference  to  our  own  persons,  urges  us  to  reformation. 
I  But  if  we  suffer  the  punishment  ourselves,  the  pain  which  we  feel, 
will  involuntarily  have  the  greatest  influence  on  us,  and  thus  the 
reformation   produced   will  be  merely  a  legal  one,  will  result  not 
from  a  hatred  to  sin,  but  from  a  fear  of  punishment.     But  in  the 

1  SQskind  On  the  possibility  of  the  remission  of  sins,  in  Flatt's  Mag.  No.  1.  p. 
1—67.  and  Seiler  on  the  questions,  Is  the  remission  of  sins  possible  ?  and  Are 
we  authorized  to  expect  that  God  will  pardon  us  through  Jesus  Ohnst  ?     17J«. 

59 


466  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  lY. 

case  of  the  substitute  (Christ)  who  endures  the  punishment  for  us, 
the  odiousness  of  sin  is  displayed  in  a  clearer  light,  and  thus  a  purely 
moral  reformation,  a  reformation  resulting  from  proper  motives,  is 
rendered  the  more  easy."     Compare  <§>  73.  111.  1. 

XIII.  The  doctrine  of  the  atonement  is  not  a  mere  accommoda- 
tion to  the  notions  of  the  Jews. — In  reply  to  the  hypothesis,  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  was  taught  by  the  apostles,  merely 
as  an  expedient  to  reconcile  the  Jews  to  the  loss  of  their  ritual 
sacrifices,  we  remark : — 1.  Jesus  did  not  distinctly  teach,  that  the 
sacrifices  of  the  Jews  would  be  abolished.  Hence  there  was  no 
necessity  for  his  speaking  of  his  death  as  being  for  the  remission  of 
sins.  Matt.  26:  28.  And  still  less  was  there  any  such  necessity 
in  the  case  of  John  the  Baptist.  John  1:29. — 2.  The  apostle 
Paul  contends  against  the  abuse  of  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ 
(Rom.  1:  6  etc.,)  but  does  not  deviate  from  his  ordinary  represen- 
tations of  this  doctrine,  though  he  had  the  most  direct  occasion  to 
do  so.  He  does  not  obviate  the  abuse  by  saying,  that  this  doctrine 
was  a  mere  accommodation  or  condescension  to  the  current  opinions 
of  the  Jews,  and  that  repentance  is  the  meritorious  cause  of  pardon. 
In  this  case  also,  he  deduces  the  sanctifying  influence  of  the  death 
of  Christ  from  its  atoning  efficacy,  and  not  the  latter  from  the  for- 
mer.— 3.  In  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  apostle  Paul  institutes 
not  merely  a  transient,  but  a  very  circumstantial  comparison  be- 
tween the  death  of  Christ  and  the  Jewish  sacrifices. — 4.  The 
whole  scheme  of  doctrine  taught  by  the  apostles,  is  founded  on  the 
fact,  that  the  death  of  Christ,  and  not  our  own  repentance  and  good 
works,  is  the  cause  of  our  salvation. 

Plank,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  theological  sciences,  Pt.  II.  p. 
481,  makes  the  following  remarks  :  "  The  idea  that  we  are  recon- 
ciled to  God  by  the  merits  of  Jesus,  was  taught  so  frequently  by 
Jesus  and  his  apostles,  and  with  such  energy,  and  so  sedulously 
interwoven  with  their  practical  instructions,  that  no  man  can  possi- 
bly be  in  earnest  who  says,  that  this  doctrine  was  held  up  by  the 
apostles  merely  as  an  empty  image,  in  order  to  induce  the  Jews  to 
abandon  their  ideas  about  sacrifices  to  which  they  were  so  much 
accustomed.  Even  had  this  been  their  object,  they  could  not  have 
adopted  a  more  unsuitable  measure,  as  the  sequel  itself  proved. "i 

XIV.  John  16:  8,  10,  tXOwv—vndyta  "  He  (the  Comforter)  will 
instruct  the  world  on  the  subject  of  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  is 
grounded  on  my  poing  to  the  Father  (my  death,  resurrection,  and 
glory.")  ALxaioGvvri  righteousness,  has  the  same  meaning  in  2  Cor. 
3:  9,  where  it  is  placed  in  opposition  to  xaraxpta*?  condemnation. 
2  Cor.  5:  18,  God  hath  given  us  the  ministry  (having  committed 
unto  us  the  word)  of  reconciliation. 


i  Gess'  Letters  on  the  doctrine  of  Accommodation  etc.  Stuttgard,  1797. 


A 


^91.]  VIEWS  OF  THE^  ATONEMENT.  467 

The  explanation  of  dixaioovi'7j  which  makes  it  signify  "  the  good 
cause  of  Christ,"  labours  under  the  difficulty  that  avzov^  which 
must  be  supplied  in  v.  8,  would  have  to  refer  at  the  same  time  to 
two  different  subjects,  to  xoa^og  and  Xgiarog ;  whereas  if  we  ren- 
der the  passage  thus,  "  He  will  instruct  the  world  on  the  subject  of 
their  sins,  their  pardon,  and  their  liberation  from  the  power  of  Sa- 
tan," it  refers  only  to  the  former. 

XV.  The  doctrine  of  the  atonement  is  a  divine  doctrine. — In 
the  passage  just  cited,  2  Cor.  5,  to  which  the  words  in  v.  20,  *'  as 
though  God  did  beseech  you  through  us,"  are  yet  to  be  added,  the 
apostolic  doctrine  concerning  the  atonement  is  expressly  attributed 
to  God  ;  and  in  John  16:  8, 10,  to  the  TiagaaXijiog  or  Spirit  of  truth, 
or  Spirit  of  God.     Comp.  v.  7  and  13.  See  ^  10.  111.  12,  13. 

Note.  On  the  various  hypothesis  relative  to  the  connexion  be- 
tween the  death  of  Christ  and  the  pardon  and  salvation  of  the 
tinner. 

The  various  hypotheses  on  this  subject,  as  well  those  of  former 
times  as  those  of  recent  date,  are  collected  in  Flatt's  Inquiries  on 
I  the  doctrine  of  reconciliation  between  God  and  man,  Pt.  I.  §  21 — 
I  31.  They  may  be  reduced  to  three  principal  classes. — 1 .  Those 
I  which  suppose  that  there  is  an  actual  causative  connexion  between 
j  the  atonement  and  the  pardon  and  salvation  of  man,  not  in  any 
sense  dependant  on  the  cooperation  of  man  himself — 2.  Those  who 
j  suppose  a  mediate  connexion,  a  connexion  through  the  medium  of 
I  the  cooperation  of  man.  Reformation  is  the  intermediate  cause. — 
i  The  manner  in  which  reformation  is  supposed  to  be  produced  by 
!  the  death  of  Christ  is  various.  <§>  90.  1. — 3.  Those  who  regard  the 
atonement  n)erely  as  a  symbolical  representation  and  declaration  of 
j  the  pardon  of  sin,  of  the  grace  and  love  of  God  ;  or,  which  amounts 
!  to  the  same  thing,  as  a  memorial  of  the  love  of  God,  from  which  the 
I  sinful  family  of  man  might  infer,  that  their  transgressions  will  be 
i  forgiven  ;  or  as  a  symbol  of  any  other  lesson  of  instruction.  To  the 
I  latter  class  belongs  the  hypothesis  of  Kant,  "  that  the  vicarious 
sufferings  of  the  Son  of  God  may  be  considered  as  a  symbol  of  the 
sufferings  which  regenerated  (renewed)  men  must  endure  on  ac- 
I  count  of  their  former  sins  (as  it  were  for  the  "  old  man") — as  a 
i  symbol  of  the  substitution  of  the  new  man  (who  suffered  during  his 
ireformation)  for  the  old  man."  In  reply  to  this  notion,  it  maybe 
I  remarked,  (a)  the  afflictions  of  life,  which  are,  by  supposition,  to  be 
{regarded  as  punishments  of  the  sins  committed  before  reformation, 
I  may  just  as  well  be  considered  as  punishments  of  the  guilt  incurred 
after  reformation. — (b.)  The  measure  of  the  afflictions  which  be- 
fall Christians,  is  not  always  proportionate  to  the  sins  committed 
previously  to  their  change. 


4^ 


OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 


Loeffler,  in  his  Dissertation  on  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement, 
has  proposed  the  hypothesis,  "  that  the  pardon  or  reconciliation 
consequent  on  the  death  of  Christ,  referred  only  to  the  past  sins  of 
the  Christians  of  that  day,  which  they  had  committed  whilst  they 
were  yet  Jews  or  Pagans,  but  that  it  does  not  relate  to  the  sins  of 
all  men,  not  to  the  sins  of  any  who  are  Christians."  Various  argu- 
ments are  adduced  in  refutation  of  this  hypothesis,  by  Staudlin, 
Paulus,  Siiskind,  Flatt,  Lang,  Niemeyer,  and  Ewald.  The  princi- 
pal are  these — 1.  The  universality  of  the  atonement,  which  is  taught 
in  the  N.  Testament  in  the  strongest  terms.  That  various  passages 
in  the  apostolical  Epistles,  which  treat  of  remission  of  sins,  should 
refer  to  new  converts  from  among  the  Jews  and  heathen,  is  very 
natural,  for  these  Epistles  were  directed  to  such  persons. — 2.  If,  as 
Loeffler  maintains,  the  death  of  Jesus  had  a  reference  only  to  the 
reception  of  converts  from  Judaism  or  paganism  into  the  christian 
church,  it  would,  for  that  very  reason  necessarily  have  to  refer  to 
their  future  participation  in  the  blessedness  of  Jesus,  and  to  the  sins 
committed  after  their  conversion ;  for  these  are  just  as  much  a 
hindrance  to  their  salvation  as  those  committed  before  their  refor- 
mation.— 3.  If  the  apostle  Paul  had  confined  the  remission  of  sins 
through  the  death  of  Christ  to  the  state  of  his  readers  prior  to  their 
conversion  to  Christianity,  he  could,  by  a  mere  statement  of  the  fact, 
have  given  a  short  and  most  decisive  refutation  of  the  objection 
(Rom.  6:  1)  "  that  the  doctrine  of  a  free,  gracious  pardon  of  sin,  is 
detrimental  to  the  cause  of  virtue." — 4.  Deliverance  from  death  as 
a  consequence  of  the  disobedience  of  our  first  parents,  (the  blessed 
resurrection  of  Christians,)  is  attributed  to  the  death  of  Jesus.  Rom. 
5:  17, 19.  1  Cor.  15:21,  22.  Heb.  2:  14.  Hence,  if  all  Christians 
die,  the  pardon  of  sins  which  results  from  the  death  of  Jesus,  must 
extend  to  Christians  also. — 5.  Agreeably  to  Heb.  9:  12,  the  re- 
demption purchased  by  the  Saviour's  death,  is  "  an  eternal  re- 
demption" aicovia  Xurgwaig,  and  his  priesthood  "  continueth  forever, 
and  is  unchangeable."  7:  24. — 6.  The  declarations  of  the  apostles, 
that  Christians  no  longer  commit  sin,  such  as  1  John  3:  9.  5:  18, 
evidently  refer  to  wilful  sin.  See  supra  »§.  56.  On  the  other  hand, 
St.  John  directs  Christians  to  apply  to  the  atonement  of  Christ  for 
the  remission  of  individual  sins.  1  John  2:  1,  2.  And  according  to 
Heb.  10:  26,  it  is  only  for  the  wilful  sinner  that  there  remaineth  no 
more  sacrifice.  And  it  certainly  comported  better  with  the  general 
design  of  the  apostles  rather  to  encourage  those  who  had  been 
reconciled  through  the  death  of  Christ  to  the  practice  of  christian 
virtue,  than  by  anticipation,  to  comfort  their  minds  in  respect  to  the 
sins  which  they  might  afterward  commit.  But  no  passage  can  be 
found,  in  which  all  hope  of  pardon  is  denied  to  the  backslider  in  an 
absolute  and  unconditional  manner. 


"J*  92.]  ATONEMENT  FAVOURABLE  TO  PIETY.  469 


SECTION    XCII. 

The  doctrine  of  the  atonement  is  not  prejudidal  to  christian  virtue, 
hut  tends  to  promote  it. 

Such  is  the  nature  of  that  scheme  which  God  devised  for  the 
salvation  of  the  human  family,  that  the  obedience  of  Jesus,  which 
was  displayed  in  a  distinguished  manner  by  his  voluntary  submission 
to  death  as  the  substitute  of  man,  confirmed  that  very  principle  of 
the  divine  justice  which  might  seem  to  have  suffered  violence  in  the 
pardon  of  man. (1)  For,  that  principle  would  withhold  from  man  a 
happiness  of  which  he  always  proves  himself  unworthy  by  his  con- 
duct in  life,  and  would  denounce  upon  him  the  punishment  of  the 
law,  if  God  had  not  mercifully  resolved  to  afford  him  his  aid,  in  a 
manner  just  as  peculiar,  as  were  the  circumstances  which  became 
the  occasion  of  his  misery  ;  circumstances  in  which  no  other  class 
of  rational  beings  was  ever  placed.  The  consoling  doctrine  of  the 
obedience  and  voluntary  sufferings  of  Jesus,  comforts  the  heart  of 
unhappy  man,  with  the  hope(2)  of  pardon  and  future  happiness. — 
But  the  obedience  of  Christ,  on  which  our  hope  of  salvation  is 
founded,  calls  on  us(3)  to  show  a  similar  obedience,  though  we  can 
never  merit  so  great  a  happiness  by  our  own  deeds.  And  nothing 
could  exert  a  more  powerful  influence,  in  deterring  us  from  volun- 
tary transgression, (4)  than  the  remembrance  of  the  fearful  punish- 
ments which  Christ  was  compelled  to  endure  in  order  to  purchase 
for  us  the  hope  of  pardon. 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  apparent  violation  of  justice  in  the  pardon  of  man. — 
It  is  evident,  of  course,  that  God  did  not  establish  the  law  relative 
to  the  connexion  between  obedience  and  happiness  without  a  fore- 
knowledge of  the  individual  case  of  man.  He  did  not  enact  the 
law  merely  in  a  general  indefinite  manner,  but  with  an  accurate 
foreknowledge  of  every  individual  case.  To  the  view  of  the  crea- 
ture, however,  who  contemplates  the  law  in  general,  the  conduct  of 
God  in  relation  to  man,  wears  the  aspect  of  an  exception  to  the 
rule.  And  the  object  of  the  scheme  of  redemption,  is  to  prevent 
the  supposition  of  other  such  exceptions  by  his  creatures,  to  guard 


470  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV, 

men  against  the  idea  that  in  other  cases  also  God  will  have  similar 
reasons  to  lead  him  to  extend  pardon,  just  as  he  had  in  reference  to 
the  human  family  at  large.     »§>  91.  111.  1. 

II.  The  atonement  ^promotes  piety  by  inspiring  hope. — This 
hope  has  a  very  important  influence  in  promoting  christian  virtue, 
just  as,  on  the  other  hand,  despair  of  pardon  and  future  happiness, 
or  a  proud  dependence  on  our  own  merits,  has  a  powerful  tendency 
to  impede  our  christian  course. 

On  the  importance  of  the  atonement  as  a  means  of  comforting 
the  sinner,  or  of  delivering  him  from  the  fear  of  the  divine  punish- 
ment, and  of  enabling  him  to  obtain  the  assurance  of  pardon  ;  and 
on  the  practical  influence  of  a  comfortable  faith  in  the  atonement, 
see  the  passages  from  the  work  on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Je- 
sus, which  are  adduced  in  <§>  73.  111.  3.  Schwartze,  in  his  work  on 
the  Death  of  Jesus,  gives  the  following  views  of  the  atonement  as 
an  incentive  to  virtue. — 1.  By  the  consolatory  influence  which  it 
exerts,  it  properly  prepares  us  for  a  life  of  piety. — 2.  It  renders  a 
life  of  piety  more  easy  and  agreeable,  by  raising  our  love  and  grati- 
tude to  God  and  the  Lord  Jesus  our  Saviour  to  the  most  exalted 
height,  and  by  presenting  to  our  view  the  sufferings  of  Jesus,  who 
was  the  most  perfect  example  of  perseverance  and  fortitude  in  the 
discharge  of  duty,  and  by  awakening  and  confirming  within  us  a 
sense  of  the  high  importance  of  man,  even  in  the  sight  of  God. 

Reinhard,  in  his  sermon  on  the  reformation,  makes  the  following 
remarks  ;  "  It  is  a  debt  which  our  church  owes  to  her  own  internal 
security,  and  to  the  peace  of  her  members,  not  to  suffer  the  doctrine 
of  the  atonement  to  be  neglected.  Is  it  possible  that  the  super- 
stition, which  searches  out  other  means  of  reconciliation  with  God, 
can  acquire  the  sway  in  her  ?  can  she  possibly  be  in  danger  of  fal- 
ling into  that  self-prescribed  service,  that  righteousness  of  works, 
which  wishes  to  make  atonement  itself,  and  deserve  heaven  by 
works,  if  she  steadfastly  adheres  to  the  doctrine  that  we  are  justified, 
without  any  merits  of  our  own,  through  that  atonement  which  was 
made  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  ?" 

III.  The  salvation  for  which  we  hope,  and  which  results  from 
the  divine  approbation  of  the  obedience  displayed  by  Christ,  is  the 
most  immediate  and  the  strongest  evidence  of  the  high  value  of 
obedience  in  the  sight  of  God. 

IV.  The  atonement  has  a  tendency  to  deter  us  from  sin. — Luke 
23:  31,  for  if  these  things  happen  to  a  green  tree  (which  produceth 
such  beautiful  fruit,)  what  shall  be  done  in  the  dry  (which  at  any 
rate  is  intended  for  the  fire  ?)  1  Pet.  1:  17,  19.  (Comp.  «§»  90.  111. 
2.)  2:  24.  4:  1  etc.  Rom.  6:  2—12.  Compare  ^  91.  111.  5.  God 
could  not  possibly  have  placed  before  the  view  of  the  inhabitants  of 
the  world  of  spirits,  in  a  more  striking  light,  the  inviolability  of  his 


<J  92.]  ATONEMENT  SUPPORTS  THE  LAW.  471 

law  and  the  certain  executions  of  its  sanctions,  than  by  exacting  the 
infliction   of  the   punishment   even  in  a  case  in  which  every  thing 
seemed  to  favour  an  exception.     For,  such  was  evidently  the  case 
before  us.     The  innocence  of  the  man  Jesus,  his  extraordinary  and 
peculiar  union  with  God,  the  divine  approbation  of  the  obedience 
which  he   had   previously  displayed,  and   his  generous  and  noble 
desire  of  sharing  his  happiness  with  his  fellowmen,  together  with  the 
peculiar  situation  of  man,  who  had  become  miserable  in  consequence 
of  Adam's  transgression,  all  seemed  to  authorize  the  expectation  that 
the  penalty  of  the  law  would  not,  in  this  case,  be  executed.    It  was 
the  blood  of  Christ,  which  gave  a  sanction  to  the  New  Covenant.— 
Matt.  26:  28,  this  is  my  blood  of  the  new  covenant.    Luke  22:  20, 
the  new  covenant  in  my  blood  ;  that  is,  the  death  of  Christ  confirmed 
the  certainty  of  the  promise  of  pardon  and  happiness,  as  well  as  the 
sanctity  of  that  condition^  on  which  pardon  and  eternal  life  are  sus- 
pended. Heb.  13:  20.  9:  20.    It  was  customary  among  ancient  na- 
tions, to  ratify  their  contracts  or  covenants  by  bloody  sacrifices.  The 
blood  of  the  covenant,  therefore,  was  forcibly  to  remind  the  Jews  of 
the  punishments  which  awaited  them  if  they  violated  their  promise 
(v.  7,)  and,  on  the  other  hand,  also  to  assure  them  of  the  certainty 
of  the  promises  given  by  God.     It  was  therefore,  at  the  same  time, 
a  lively  memorial  of  the  severe  punishment  which  awaited  the  trans- 
gressor of  this  covenant,  and,  on  the  part  of  God,  the  most  solemn 
confirmation  of  the  pardon  which  the  covenant  promised.^  The  truth 
of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  is   evinced,  not  so  much  by  his  death,  as 
by  other  proofs  (<§>  7  etc.,)  especially  by  his  resurrection,  «§>  83.  III. 
6.     But  the  inviolable  sanctity  of  that  part  of  the  divine  doctrines, 
which  promises  salvation  to  man  on  a  certain,  fixed  condition,  is 
displayed  in  the  most  forcible  manner  by  that  doctrine  of  the  chris- 
tian scheme  which  expressly  teaches,  that  "  the  Son  of  God  died  in 
order  to  procure  pardon  for  us  in  a  manner  consistent  with^the  au- 
thority of  the  law,  which  requires  obedience  ;  that  this  exalted  man 
laid  down  his  life  a  sacrifice,  for  our  advantage,  and  for  the  honour 
of  the  divine  law."     In  other  words,  from  the  fact  and  the  design 
of  Christ's  death,  we  may  infer  how  earnestly  God  desires  that  we 
should  obtain  salvation,^  and  that  we  should  obtain  it  by  showing 

[that  obedience  which  is  the  condition  on  which  it  is  suspended.  1 
Pet.  1:2.  As  God  confirmed  the  new  covenant  by  Jesus,  making 
him  the  surety  of  it  (Heb.  7:  22,)  Jesus  is  called  the  Mediator  of 
it  (Heb.  12:  24,)^  not  only  because  it  was  through  him  that  God 


1  Heb.  8:  10.  10:  16.  Rom.  3:  22,25.  Phil.  3:  9. 

2  Comment,  on  Heb.  9:  20.  infra,  §  114. 

3  Rom.  8:  32.  Heb.  12:  24.  10:  19.  Schwartze,  p.  179—184,  where  the  death  of 
Jesus  is  viewed  as  a  proof  that  God  is  love,  that  he  is  the  God  and  Father  of  all 
mankind.  ^  Comment,  on  Heb.  in  loc. 


472  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

published^  ihe  promise  and  condition  of  pardon,  not  only  for  the 
reason  on  account  of  which  Moses  was  the  mediator  of  the  old 
covenant  (Gal.  3:  19.  Heb.  12:  18—21.  9:  19  ;)  but  also  because 
Christ  was  the  Priest  of  the  new  covenant,^  or  because  in  conse- 
quence of  his  atonement,^  he  dwells  in  the  presence  of  God  as  au- 
thor'* of  our  pardon  and  salvation.  And  finally,  Jesus  is  denomina- 
ted the  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  (fiealtrjg  -Oeov  xal  avd^gui- 
TiMVj)  not  only  because  God  announced  salvation  to  men  through 
him,  but  also  because  it  was  by  Jesus,  as  the  immediate  Author  of 
it,  that  God  provided  this  salvation  for  mankind  (1  Tim.  2:  6  ;)  be- 
cause it  is  through  Jesus,  that  he  still  carries  on  the  work  of  salva- 
tion, and  because  he  will  ultimately  also,  in  the  most  solemn  man- 
ner, bestow  this  salvation  on  those  who  shall  obtain  it,  through  its 
Author  and  Publisher,  Jesus. 

Schwartze,  in  discussing  the  evidence  of  the  divinity  of  Christ's 
mission,  and  the  truth  of  his  doctrines  as  far  as  they  are  deducible 
from  his  death,  reduces  it  to  the  following  heads  : — 1.  All  the  cir- 
cumstances attending  the  death  of  Jesus,  combine  to  prove  that  he 
was  not  merely  a  sincere,  benevolent  philosopher,  who  became  a 
sacrifice  to  his  reformation. — 2.  They  establish  the  fact,  that  he 
was  not  led  astray  by  fanaticism. — 3.  Hence,  the  most  natural 
method  of  explaining  these  circumstances,  is  really  to  regard  him  as 
the  personage  he  professed  to  be,  namely,  the  Son  of  God. 


SECTION    XCIII. 


Collateral  objects  of  the  atonement. 
There  ^re  various  other  benevolent  objects,  which  were  connect- 
ed with  the  chief  design  of  the  death  of  Christ.(l)  Such  were  the 
termination  of  the  Mosaic  system  of  sacrifices, (2)  the  abrogation(3) 
of  the  entire  Mosaic(4)  preparatory  institutions,(5)  and  the  cessa- 
tion of  the  distinction  between  the  Jews  and  other  nations. (6)  In 
addition  to  these  effects  of  the  atonement,  other  aspects  of  this 
event  present  themselves,  which,  though  they  would  have  been  in- 
sufficient to  induce  God  to  sentence  Jesus  to  so  ignominious  a 
punishment,  could,  nevertheless,  well  be  combined  with  the  main 
design  of  his  death,  after  that  event  had  been  resolved  on. (7) 

1  Heb.  12:  25.  2  Heb.  8:  6.  9:  15, 11.  3  Heb.  9:  15.  8:  3. 

4  Heb.  8: 1—4.  9:  12, 14.  §  86.  III.  1. 


§  93.]  system  of  sacrifices  annulled.  473 

Illustrations. 

I»  The  main  design. — The  apostle  Paul  declares  (Gal.  2:  21,) 
that  the  death  of  Christ  would  have  been  in  vain,  if  it  v^^ere  not  the 
ground  on  which  our  pardon  is  effected.  But  he,  at  the  same  time, 
infers  (v.  11  etc.)  that  Christians  are  no  longer  obligated  to  the  ob- 
servance of  the  Jewish  ceremonies.^ 

II.  System  of  sacrifices  annulled. — He  (Christ)  taketh  away  the 
first  (sacrifices  which  are  offered  by  the  law,)  that  he  may  establish 
the  second  ("  I  come  to  do  thy  will,")  by  which  will  (concerning 
the  offering  up  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  once  for  all)  we  are  sancti- 
fied— for  by  one  offering,  he  hath  perfected  forever  them  that  are 
sanctified — But  where  there  is  remission  of  sins,  there  is  no  more 
sacrifice  for  them.  Heb.  10:  8 — 18.  Which  was  a  figure  for  the 
time  then  present — appointed  until  the  time  of  a  better  institution — 
But  Christ  came  as  highpriest  of  future  good  things — by  his  own 
blood  he  entered  once  for  all  into  the  holy  place,  having  obtained 
eternal  redemption.     Heb.  9:  9 — 12. 

III.  Abrogation  of  the  ceremonial  law. — Heb.  7:  12,  now,  if  the 
priesthood  is  changed  (transferred  to  Christ,)  it  necessarily  follows 
that  the  law  (which  admits  of  no  other  than  Levitical  priests)  must 
also  be  changed, 

IV.  Same  subject  continued. — The  Mosaic  economy  or  the  Mo- 
saic law,  is  called  the  "  Old"^  or  '''  first"^  covenant,  in  contradis- 
tinction from  the  '•  New'"'  or  "  second"^  covenant,  which  affords 
much  greater  privileges  (Heb.  8:  6.  7:  22,)  and  is  of  eternal  dura- 
tion. Heb.  13:  20.  9:  12.  "The  one  covenant,"  we  are  told, 
(Gal.  4:  24)  "  is  from  the  Mount  Sinai."  The  ministry  which,  in 
2  Cor.  ch.  3,  is  placed  in  opposition  to  the  ministry  of  the  New 
Covenant,  is  termed  "  a  ministry  of  the  letter  (v.  6)  engraven  with 
letters  on  stone."  v.  7.  "  The  reading  of  the  Old  Covenant"  signi- 
fies "  the  reading  of  Moses."  v.  14,  15.  See  also  Heb.  8:  7,  9.  9: 1. 
A  covenant  is  a  solemn  contract  under  certain  conditions.  The 
promise  of  Isaac's  birth  and  the  possession  of  Palestine,  God  con- 
firmed to  Abraham  by  the  establishment  of  a  covenant.  Gen.  15:4. 
13:  9.  In  like  manner,  that  subsequent  legislation  which  was  con- 
nected with  this  promise,  was  also  represented  as  a  covenant.  Ex. 
ch.  24.  And  the  same  name  is  given  to  that  new  dispensation  which 
God  established  for  the  benefit  of  all  nations,  through  Jesus  Christ, 
the  most  exalted  of  all  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  and  which  was 


'  On  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  457.  Comp.  §  73.  III.  3  supra. 
2  2  Cor.  3:  14.  Heb.  8;  13.  3  Heb.  8:  7-13.  9:  1, 13,  18. 

4  Mark  14:  24.    1  Cor.  11:  24.    2  Cor.  3:  G.    Heb.  8:  8,  13.  9:  15.  12:  24.  in  all 
/hich  passages  the  expression  aaivij  Sia&jjttij  occurs. 

5  Heb.  8:  7,  SevTSQa  SmdT'jUTj. 

60 


474  OP  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

the  developement  of  that  scheme  which  was  begun  by  God  with  the 
promise  of  a  son  to  Abraham.  Moms,  in  his  Epitome  Theo}. 
Christianae,  says,  "  A  covenant  of  God  with  man,  is  a  promise  of 
certain  blessings,  suspended  on  a  condition.  Formerly  God  prom- 
ised to  the  Jews  certain  blessings,  suited  to  them  as  a  nation  (tem- 
poral, civil  happiness,)  if  they  would  obey  the  laws  of  Moses.  Now, 
he  promises  to  all  nations  the  pardon  of  sin,  and  eternal  felicity,  if 
they  will  believe."^  In  one  passage,  Heb.  9:  16,  the  New  Cove- 
nant is,  in  the  train  of  discussion,  compared  to  a  testament  or  be- 
quest. Paul  did  not,  however,  intend  by  this  comparison,  that  Jesus 
had  to  die  in  order  that  he  might  bestow  on  us  an  eternal  inheri- 
tance. He  had  previously  (ch.  8:  8 — 12)  proved  from  the  des- 
cription of  the  New  Covenant  by  Jeremiah,  that  God  had  promised 
redemption  from  the  punishments  of  sin ;  and  that  this  pardon  re- 
quired the  death  of  Christ,  he  had  previously  shown  from  the  idea 
of  a  priest  (8:  3.)  For,  according  to  Ps.  110:  4,  a  priest  was  re- 
quired in  the  New  Testament  also.  The  reference  to  a  testament, 
is  merely  a  collateral  idea,  which  resulted  from  the  ambiguity  of 
the  word  covenant^  dicci^rjxt} ;  and  the  apostle  does  not  dwell  on  it, 
but  returns  again  (v.  18)  to  the  principal  feature  of  a  covenant. — 
Still,  it  was  not  unnatural  to  compare  a  covenant,  which  makes  the 
inheritance  of  the  family  or  people  of  God  (Heb.  3:  6.  9:  15)  de- 
pendant on  the  death  of  him  who  made  the  covenant,  to  a  testament. 
V.  Subject  continued. — Gal.  2:  14 — 19.  I  regard  the  word 
"law"  {yo^ogw.  16,  19)  as  signifying  not  merely  the  ceremonial 
law ;  for  it  evidently  means  every  precept  which  connects  our  sal- 
vation with  the  observance  of  certain  duties,  with  works  and  not 
faith.  Still,  the  general  proposition,  that  we  cannot  obtain  salvation 
by  the  observance  of  the  law,  includes  the  particular  truth,  that  we 
are  not  to  perform  the  ceremonial  precepts  with  a  view  of  obtaining 
a  title  to  salvation  by  them  as  some  of  the  Jews  vainly  recommended. 
Acts  15:  1.  If  then  the  observance  of  them  is  obhgatory  on 
Christians  at  all,  there  must  be  some  other  ground  on  which  the  ob- 
ligation rests.  But  this  was  not  the  case,  inasmuch  as  it  could  be 
proved  that  those  ceremonies  had  only  a  conditional  necessity  for  a 
certain  time,  that  the  views  which  led  to  their  establishment,  were 
of  such  a  nature,  that  after  the  introduction  of  the  new  economy  by 
Jesus  Christ,  they  would  rather  be  injurious  than  beneficial  ;  in  short 
it  can  be  proved  that  tliey  were  preparatory  to  the  advent  of  the 

1  Foedus  Dei  cum  honiinibus,  est  promissio  bonoruni  cum  conditione.  01in> 
Deus  promiserat  nalioni  Judaicse  bona  huic  nation!  proprie  destinata,  si  Mosaicam 
legem  observarent.  Nunc  proinittit  omnibus  nationibus  veniam  peccati  felicita- 
temque  sempiternam  si  TCtarsvaojat,  p.  160.  See  Meyer's  Dissert,  foederis  cum 
Jeliova  notionem  in  V.  T.  scriptis  frcquentissime  obviani  illustrans,  Goettingen^ 
1797. 


^  93*]  ^  JEWS  AND  GENTILES  UNITED.  475 


Saviour  (Gal.  3:  19,  23,)  and  therefore  necessarily  fell  to  the  ground 
when  the  new  economy  was  established  by  Jesus  himself.  Gal.  3: 
25,  but  since  faith  is  come,  we  are  no  longer  under  a  schoolmaster 
(or  pedagogue,  one  who  has  the  care  of  youth.)  4:  5.  Heb.  8:  7 — 
13,  for  if  the  first  (covenant)  had  been  faultless,  then  would  noplace 
have  been  sought  for  the  second — he  hath  made  the  first  old.  The 
following  remarks  are  made  in  explanation  of  Gal.  4:  4,  5,  in  the 
Programma  de  consensu  epistolarum  Pauli  ad  Hebraeos  et  Galatas  : 
God  sent  his  Son  into  the  world,  not  only  as  a  man,  but  as  a  Jew, 
who  was  under  obligation  to  observe  the  Mosaic  institutions  ("  born 
under  the  law,")  to  purchase  specifically  for  the  Jews  the  right  of 
filiation,  and  thus  to  deliver  them  from  the  law  'ivu  rovg  vno  vo/aov 
i^ayoQccGrj,  For  he  delivered  them  from  the  dominion  of  the  law, 
by  liberating  them  from  the  fear  of  the  punishment  of  the  law, 
through  his  atonement,  and  by  thus  inspiring  them  with  a  filial  dis- 
position. How  much  less,  then,  could  the  other  Christians,  who 
had  been  gentiles,  and  for  whom  Christ  had  also  purchased  the  right 
of  filiation,  be  brought  under  obligation  to  observe  the  Mosaic  law 
when  they  embraced  Christianity  ?  Eph.  2:  15,  16,  having  abolish- 
ed the  law  of  commandments  in  ordinances.  Col.  2:  14,  "  God 
blotted  out  the  handwriting  (the  Mosaic  law)  by  letting  Christ  be 
crucified ; — he,  as  it  were,  nailed  them  to  the  cross  of  Christ  (he 
destroyed  the  validity  of  the  law.")  The  death  of  Christ,  by  which 
we  obtain  the  pardon  of  our  sins,  renders  superfluous  the  propitia- 
tory sacrifices  which  prefigured  the  more  perfect  sacrifice,  Christ 
himself  (v.  17,)  which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come,  but  the  body 
[substance]  is  Christ.  The  Mosaic  law,  in  general,  would  fall  to 
the  ground  with  the  Levitical  sacrifices,  as  it  was  so  closely  inter- 
woven with  the  laws  concerning  priests  and  sacrifices. 

VI.  The  wall  of  partition  betiveen  the  Jews  and  other  nations 
'broken  down. — Ephes.  2:  13  etc.  he  (Jesus  Christ)  is  our  peace, 
who  hath  made  both  one — having,  in  his  flesh,  abolished  the  enmity 
— having  slain  the  enmity  on  his  cross.  Col.  2:  14,  "  the  hand- 
writing (the  Mosaic  law,)  the  ordinances  of  which  prevented  our 
union  with  the  Gentiles."  John  1 1:  51,  Jesus  Christ  should  die 
not  only  for  the  (Jewish)  nation,  but  also  that  he  might  gather  to- 
gether in  one  the  children  of  God  that  are  scattered  abroad. 

Vli.  Secondary  collateral  designs  of  the  atonement. — The  con- 
firmation of  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  and  the  exhibition  of  an  obedi- 
ence to  God  of  a  peculiar  kind,  belong  to  this  class.  Another  such 
design  is  mentioned  by  Schwartze  as  being  inferable  from  the  New 
Testament,  viz.  to  weaken  and  destroy,  especially  in  the  minds  of 
his  disciples,  their  erroneous  Jewish  ideas  relative  to  a  temporal 
kino-dom  to  be  erected  by  the   Messiah.     In  refutation  of  the  by- 


476  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IV. 

pothesis,  that  the  object  of  the  atonement  last  mentioned  was  its 
chief  object,  Lang  remarks,  "  The  death  of  Jesus  did  not  destroy 
the  worldly  expectations  of  his  disciples  ;  they  continued  unimpair- 
ed at  his  resurrection.  Acts  1:  6.  And  the  fact  that  they  rehn- 
quished  those  temporal  views,  and  adopted  nobler  views  of  the 
Messiah,  after  the  Saviour  had  left  ihem  and  had  gone  to  his  Father, 
resulted  from  the  circumstance,  that  they  received  particular  in- 
structions from  that  Holy  Spirit  (the  Comforter,)  whom  the  Saviour 
promised  to  send  to  them." 


BOOK     IV. 

OF    THE    REDEEMER. 


PART    11. 

OF  THE  WORKS  OF  THE  REDEEMER  AS  LORD 
OVER  ALL  THINGS. 

SECTION  II. 

DISCUSSION  OP  THE  SUBJECT  IN  GENERAL. 


SECTION    XCIV. 


In  his  state  of  exaltation  also,  Jesus  is  engaged  in  accomplishing 
the  salvation  of  men. 

Although  the  work  of  Jesus  on  earth  has  been  accomph'shed,  the 
welfare  of  the  human  family  continues  still  to  be  the  object  of  his 
attention. (1)  He  is  now  engaged  in  the  farther  accomplishment  of 
the  scheme  of  salvation  devised  by  God.  Is.  53:  10.  He  exercises 
the  right  by  which  he  purchased  his  obedience  even  unto  death,  the 
right(2)  to  bestow  salvation  upon  man,  who  not  only  did  not  merit 
happiness,  but  who  even  deserved  the  highest  misery.  He  regards 
it  as  an  occupation  not  unworthy  of  his  present  exalted  station, (3) 
to  indulge  those  feelings  of  compassion  for  the  human  family,  which 
his  own  experience  tended  to  render  still  more  acute,  and  to  exert 
his  omnipotent,  providential  protection  in  the  advancement  of  their 
welfare.  (4) 


478  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK. 


Illustrations. 

I.  Agency  of  Jesus  in  his  state  of  exaltation. — 1  John  2:  1,  w« 
have  (a  Comforter)  an  advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ. 
Rom.  8:  34,  Christ  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  maketl  ^ 
intercession  (^hivy^avit,)  for  us.  Heb.  7:  25,  he  is  able  to  save 
unto  the  end  (forever)  them  that  come  unto  God  by  him,  ever  living 
to  make  intercession  for  them  [Ivxvyxdvatv  vniQ  uvtmv.)  The  ex- 
pression Ivxvyiuvivv  to  make  intercession,  indicates,  that  since  Je- 
sus has  been  raised  from  the  dead,  he  is  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  and  engaged  for  the  benefit  of  man  {yniQ  rj^icjv  1  John  2:  1. 
The  opposite  is  ivTvyx<^^^^V  >t«r«  tivog.  Rom.  11:  2.)  that  not  only 
his  life  and  his  death,  but  also  his  government  as  God,  is  beneficial 
to  the  interests  of  man.  It  also  indicates,  that  as  Jesus  is  risen  from 
the  dead  (Rom.  5:  9,)  and  shall  live  forever,  his  salutary  exertions 
for  our  welfare  are  not  confined  to  his  life  on  earth,  but  are  contin- 
ued in  the  other  world,  ow^eiv;  that  his  present  residence  with  God 
in  heaven  is  devoted  to  the  advancement  of  our  welfare.  Heb.  9: 
24.  6:20.  Comp.  ^86.  111.  1. 

Morus  has  collected  the  various  explanations  of  the  passages  in 
which  ivxev^vQ  vniQ  rifimv  intercession  for  us,. is  attributed  to  Christ. 
He  observes  that  ivivyxf^veiv  nvi  to  intercede  for  any  one,  has  the 
general  signification,  to  labour  (in  any  way)  in  conjunction  with 
another,  in  the  promotion  of  an  object ;  and  he  endeavours  to  show 
that  avTvyxciveiv  vnig  avTCJv,  in  Heb.  7:  25,  is  synonymous  with 
GM^eiv  immediately  preceding  it.  The  general  idea  of  the  passage 
would  therefore  be  "  that  Jesus  is  still,  at  the  present  day,  the  Au- 
thor of  our  salvation,  and  will  continue  to  be  so  forever."^ 

II.  His  legal  right  to  save  sinners. — The  just  Governor  of  the 
universe  (Heb.  7:  2,  ^aaiXfvg  dinaioavvrjg,)  before  his  entrance  on 
the  government  of  the  world,  made  provision,  that  the  honour  of  the 
law,  according  to  which  he  dispensed  rewards  and  punishments, 
should  not  be  violated,  but  on  the  other  hand  rather  promoted,  by 
the  work  of  redemption,  and  by  the  mercy  which,  for  special  rea- 
sons, he  extended  to  the  family  of  man.  This  he  accomplished  by 
his  own  personal  obedience  and  by  voluntarily  suffering  the  punish- 
ment of  our  sins.  In  order  to  maintain  the  honour  of  the  divine 
laws,  which  was  so  important  to  the  future  Ruler  of  the  world,  the 
right  to  bestow  salvation  on  men  was  given  him  on  the  condition 
that  he  should  take  upon  himself  the  punishment  due  to  them.^ 

III.  Dignity  of  Jesus. — The  dignity  of  Jesus  is  evident  from 

1  De  notionibus  universis  in  theologia  Dissert.  Vol.  1.  p.  298  etc. 

2  On  the  Design  of  thedeatii  of  Ciirist,  p.  575,  669. 


§>  95.]  Christ's  legal  bight  to  pardon  sin.  479 

:he  fact,  that  by  virtue  of  it  he  is  enabled  to  extend  relief  to  men, 
md  from  the  circumstance  that  he  is,  at  the  same  time,  Priest  and 
King.  Hence  he  is  called  "  King  of  peace,"  {^aadfvg'jigi^vtig, 
'ibt  i.  q.  SibU)",  as  is  remarked  in  the  Dissert,  de  sensu  histor.,)  i.  e. 
I  king  who  is  author  of  salvation.  He  is  called,  in  Heb.  6:  20, 
'  priest  according  to  the  order  of  Melchisedek,  that  is.  Priest  and 
King. 

zlo^Tj  v.ai  ttfiT]  iaTfq)avwfAtvog — agx^yog  aajTfjgiag.  Acts  5:  31. 
Irleb.  2:  9.  2:  10.  comp.  v.  9.  "  The  great  honour  of  being  Au- 
hor  of  salvation  to  his  brethren,  belonged  to  the  exaltation  of  Jesus,- 
uh'tcoaig."* 

IV.  Administration  of  Christ  for  the  benefit  of  his  people, — 
Luke  1:  33.  Heb.  7:  24—28.  On  the  passage  1  Cor.  15:  24 — 
28,  see  the  Dissert,  de  notione  regni  coelestis,  p.  19.  Compare  <^ 
42.  111.  10.  <§»83.  III.  11. 


SECTION  XCV. 

The  happiness  ivhich  Jesus  derives  from  the  welfare  of  his  people, 
constitutes  part  of  his  reward. 
Jesus  will  forever  continue  to  feel  the  most  ardent  desire  for  the 
(velfare  of  his  people  ;(1)  and  in  the  accomplishment  of  this  desire, 
ae  finds  the  reward  of  his  obedience.  Hence,  it  is  evident  that  the 
residence  of  Jesus  in  heaven  must  be  beneficial  to  the  interests  of 
his  people.  The  happiness  which  he  is  himself  to  enjoy,  is  con- 
nected with  the  welfare  of  mankind,  who  are  so  dear  to  him.  He 
is  beloved(2)  and  honoured(3)  when  his  friends  are  honoured  and 
beloved.  It  is  on  his  account,  that  those  who  strive  after  holiness, 
are  pleasing  to  God, (4)  notwithstanding  their  imperfections ;  it  is 
hrough  his  influence,  that  they  may  now  pour  out  their  supplica- 
tions with  confidence,  for  the  aid  of  heaven. (5) 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  desire  of  Jesus  for  the  welfare  of  his  people.— John  10: 
14__28.  14:  21.  15:  10.  17:  24.  Rom.  8:  34,  who  shall  separate 
us  from  the  love  of  Christ?  Heb.  7:  25.  4:  15. 


'  1  On  the  design  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  598. 


480  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

II.  How  Jesus  is  beloved. — John  17:  23,  26,  thou  hast  loved 
them  as  thou  hast  loved  me.  14:  21,  23.  16:  27,  the  Father  loveth 
you,  because  ye  have  loved  me,  3:  35.  Compare  <§.  87.  111.  7. 

III.  How  he  is  honoured. — John  12:  26,.  if  any  man  serve  me, 
him  will  my  Father  honour.  8:  50,  the  Father  seeks  my  honour — 
"  verily,  to  him  who  keepeth  my  word,  will  he  give  eternal  life." 

IV.  We  are  accepted  for  Christ's  saJce. — 1  John  2:  1 .  Rom.  8: 
34.  1  Pet.  2:  5,  spiritual  sacrifices  acceptable  to  God  through  Je- 
sus Christ.  Heb.  13:21,  *' May  God  work  in  you  what  is  well 
pleasing  in  his  sight,  through  the  mediation  of  Jesus  Christ."  The 
sacrifice  of  Christ  and  the  divine  approbation  of  his  perfect  obedience, 
is  of  much  advantage  to  us,  even  in  the  acceptance  of  any  thing 
good  that  is  in  us:  for  our  best  works  are  mingled  with  sin.  v.  15, 
*'  Let  us  bring  unto  God  a  sacrifice  of  praise,  through  the  mediation 
of  Christ  our  priest,  through  whose  influence  our  prayers  are  made 
worthy  of  acceptance." 

V.  Heb.  10:  19 — 22,  let  us  draw  near  in  full  assurance  of  faith. 
4:  15. 


SECTION  xcyi. 

Jesus  promotes  the  welfare  of  manlcind ,  by  virtue  of  his  dominion 
over  all  things. 

But  it  is  not  only  for  Jesus'  saJce,  it  is  also  through  Jesus,  that 
God  bestows  salvation  on  man.  It  was  with  this  view,  that  the  man 
(1)  Jesus  was  raised  from  the  dead,  that(2)  he  might  be  Lord  and 
Judge  of  the  whole  human  family,  of  the  living  and  the  dead. (3) 
And  as  the  administration  of  the  concerns  of  man  could  not  well  be 
conducted,  excepting  in  connexion  with  the  government  of  the 
whole  universe  ;  the  whole  world, (4)  even  the  ranks  of  angels 
themselves,(5)  are,  in  connexion  with  the  human  family,  subjected 
to  the  government  of  Jesus.  (6) 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  man  Jesus. — John  5:  27.  Acts  17:  3L  Compare <$>  65. 
111.7. 

II.  Design  of  his  resurrection. — Rom.  14:  9,  for  to  this  end 


«§>  97.]  AGENCY  OP  JESUS  IN  HEAVEN.  481 

Christ  both  died  and  rose  and  revived,  that  he  might  be  Lord  both 
of  the  dead  and  the  Hving.  Col.  1:  18,  "he  is  Ruler  (agxri  Tit.  3: 
1)  after  he  had  been  raised  from  the  dead,  in  order  that  he  might 
be  the  first  among  all."  It  was  needful  that  he  should  die,  in  order 
to  obtain  that  universal  dominion  which  is  so  beneficial  to  the  inter- 
ests of  his  children,  and  that  he  should  rise  again,  in  order  that  he 
might  actually  enter  on  this  dominion.  See  Dissert.  1.  in  ep.  ad 
Coloss.  note  33.  30. 

III.  Christ  the  Judge.— Acts  17:  31.  Rom.  4:  9.  2  Tim.  4:  1. 
Acts  10:  42. 

IV.  Chris fs  universal  dominion. — Eph.  1:  20 — 22.  Col.  1:  18, 
and  he  is  the  head  of  the  (his)  body,  the  church.  The  universal 
dominion  of  Jesus  is  the  subject  of  discourse  in  the  preceding  and 
subsequent  parts  of  the  context.  When  the  church  is  called  "  the 
body  of  Christ"  (amfia  Xgiazov  Ephes.  1:  23,)  her  particular  con- 
nexion with  the  Lord  over  all  things  (v.  20,  22)  by  virtue  of  which 
he  is  particularly  her  Lord,  neqjaXij  vnig  ndvia  v.  22,  is  compared 
to  the  union  between  a  husband,  x^grftArJ,  and  wife,  aojfia  (Eph.  5: 
23,  28.)  See  also  2  Cor.  11:  2.  John  3:  29.  and  Dissert.  I.  in 
epist.  ad  Coloss.  Note  29,  30.  Compare  supra  <§>  78.  111.  8. 

V.  Christ  is  Lord  over  the  angels. — Matt.  13:  41,  the  Son  of 
man  shall  send  forth  his  angels.  Heb.  1:  14,  Xenovgyiyioi  nvevixaxa 
"  they  must  await  the  commands  which  are  given  them  from  the 
throne  on  which  Jesus  sits." 

VI.  Jesus  exercises  universal  dominion. — Ephes.  1:  10,  "God 
hath  determined  in  the  time  that  yet  remaineth  (in  the  time  of  the 
IVew  Covenant)  to  commit  the  government  of  every  thing^  that 
transpires  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  into  the  hands  of  Jesus"  {avu%i- 
(falaicoaao&at  zd  iiavza  Iv  rw  X.QtQim^  summam  rerum  omnium 
Christo  permittere.     See  Diss,  de  sensu  vocis  nXriQfunu,  ^  VII. 


SECTION    XCVII. 


Agency  of  Jesus  in  bestowing  salvation  on  his  worshippers  in  the 

life  to  come. 

All  those  who  do  not  themselves  prevent  their  salvation,  are, 
when  they  leave  this  world,  received  by  the  mighty  Redeemer  into 
the  habitations  of  the  blessed.  (2  Tim.  4:  18.  Comp.  <§.  65.)  And 
the  presence  of  this  most  blessed  of  all  men,  is  a  source  of  pleasure 
and  of  various  blessings(l)  to  the  inhabitants  of  those  regions,  even 
61 


482  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IV. 

for  those  who  had  entered  them  previously  to  his  arrival  there.  «5> 
65.  111.  5.  Finally,  he  will  prove  himself  the  Redeemer  of  his  peo- 
ple, by  delivering  their  bodies(2)  from  death,  and  by  all(3)  the 
manifestations  of  his  power  connected  with  it  (^  61.  65,)  and  be- 
stow salvation  on  them  in  the  new  dispensation  by  his  everlasting 
dominion.  (5) 

Illustration?* 

I.  The  presence  of  Jesus,  is  a  source  of  happiness  to  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  celestial  world.  John  17:  24.  2  Cor.  5:  8.  Rev.  7:17, 
the  Lamb  that  is  in  the  midst  of  the  throne,  shall  feed  them,  and 
shall  lead  them  to  living  fountains  of  water. 

II.  Jesus  will  raise  our  bodies  from  the  dead. — Rom.  8:  23.  1 
Cor.  15:  21—26.  Comp.  *§>  62. 

III.  Displays  of  his  j/otver. — Even  the  solemnities  of  the  judg- 
ment, which  will  take  place  about  this  time  (§  65.  111.  5,)  are  per- 
fectly consistent  with  the  character  of  the  Redeemer  of  men.  For, 
that  judgment  will  confer  honour  and  happiness  on  some  of  its  sub- 
jects ;  whilst  the  condemnation  of  the  wicked  will  be  an  evidence  of 
the  displeasure  of  the  Judge  at  those  who  prevented  their  own  sal- 
vation, and  the  accomplishment  of  the  Redeemer's  wishes,  and  will 
thus  also  evince  his  earnest  desire  for  their  salvation.  Finally,  it 
will  show  the  love  of  the  Redeemer  to  those  who  were  contemned 
or  even  abused  by  the  wicked  (Matt.  25:41.  2  Thess.  1:  6.  Luke 
18:  7,)  and  who  could  not  be  perfecdy  happy  if  the  wicked  were 
not  separated  from  them.  Matt.  13:  41 — 43.  Comp.  <§.  58.  111.  3. 

IV.  The  Saviour. — Phil.  3:  20,  from  whence  (from  heaven)  we 
look  for  the  Saviour,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Ephes.  4:  30,  the  day 
of  redemption.  Heb.  9:  28,  to  them  that  look  for  him,  shall  he  ap- 
pear the  second  time  without  sin,  unto  salvation. 

V.  He  shall  preserve  us  forever. — 1  Thess.  4:  17,  and,  so  shall 
fve  be  ever  with  the  Lord.  John  14:  3.  Rev.  21:22.  22:  3.  §  62. 


SECTION    XCVIII. 


Jesus  prepares  us  in  the  present  life,  for  happiness  in  the  life  to 

come.     ' 
The  providential  care  of  Jesus  for  men,  is  engaged  in  preparing 
them(l)  in  this  life,  for  that  happiness  which  he  will  bestow  on  them 


^  98.]      JESUS  PREPARES  US  FOR  FUTURE  HAPPINESS.      483 

hereafter ;  he  is  making  them  worthy  of  all  these  future  blessings 
which  are  reserved  for  them.  It  is  only  as  exerted  upon  those  to 
whom  the  revelation  is  known,  that  we  are  acquainted  with  this 
agency  of  Jesus.  For,  although  the  providence  of  the  Redeemer 
of  all  men  (1  John  2:  2.  1  Tim.  2:  5,  6)  certainly  also  extends  to 
all  men,  we  are  nevertheless  totally  unacquainted  with  the  manner 
in  which  he  exerts  his  agency  for  the  welfare  of  those  who  are  ig- 
norant of  his  doctrines  (<5>  71.)  And  it  is  certainly  very  natural, 
that  the  records  which  treat  of  this  providential  care  of  the  Re- 
deemer, should  speak  of  it  with  particular  reference  to  those  who 
should  read  those  records  or  learn  their  contents  ;  for  it  is  to  them 
that  the  Gospel  is  addressed,  and  their  interests  and  duties  there- 
fore should  of  course  be  considered. 

Illustration. 

Acts  5;  31,  him  hath  God  exalted  to  his  right  hand,  a  Prince  and 
dour  (a  prince  of  salvation,)  to  give  repentance  unto  Israel,  and 
the  remission  of  sins.  Compare  <§>  65.  HI.  2.  Heb.  2:  10,  "  He  is 
the  captain  of  our  salvation,  through  whom,  God  will  bring  many 
sons  unto  glory." 


# 


BOOK   IV. 

OF    THE    REDEEMER. 


PART    11. 

THE  DIFFERENT  WORKS  OF  CHRIST  (HIS 
OFFICES.) 

SECTION   III. 

THE    PROVIDENTIAL    CARE    OF    CHRIST    OVER    HIS    CHURCH. 


SECTION    XCIX. 


The  Christian  church. 


The  collective  body(l)  of  those  who  have  received(2)  the  Chris 
tian  doctrines,  together  with  all  those  who  are  to  be  qualified(3)  for 
the  reception  of  them,  is  termed  "  the  church  of  God  and  of  Christ" 
(4)  ;  that  is(5)  the  people  or  family  of  God  and  of  Christ(6);  who 
worship  Christ,  and  in  so  doing,  God  as  their  Lord,(7)  and  who  are^ 
supported  and  governed  by  his  particular  providence. 


Illustrations. 

I.  The  church  not  sectional. — 1  Cor.  1:  2.  Paul  embraces  in 
one  the  christian  congregation  in  Corinth,  and  all  Christians  in  all 
places,  h  navil  zonco.  John  10:  16,  /w/a  noif^vrj  one  flock.  1  Cor. 
12:  12  etc.  navug  ilg  ev  Gcofia  i^anzla&rjfxev  eitt  'lovdalot,  eirs  EK- 
Xr]v£g  we  are  all  baptized  into  one  body,  whether  we  are  Jews  or 
Greeks.  Rom.  12:  4,  ol  noXlol  ev  awfid  ioficv  tv  Xqigtm  we  many 
are  one  body  in  Christ.     Eph.  4:  4 — 6. 


§  99.]  THE  CHURCH  OP  CHRIST.  486 


II.  Subject  continued. — In  other  words,  all  those  who  are  call- 
ed {xXrjToi  1  Cor.  1:  2,)  in  the  sense  of  this  phrase  which  is  given 
in  <J  71.  III.  2 ;  or  all  those  who  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  could 
not  be  reckoned  among  the  Jews  or  Gentiles,  who  belonged  not  to 
the  'lovdaioig  xal  "EXXriGi  (1  Cor.  10:  32,)  are  sometimes  called 
"  the  church." 

III.  Membership  of  children. — Comp.  ^  112.  Little  children 
were  included  also  among  the  ancient  people  of  God.  Gen.  17:  10 
—14.  Children  eight  days  old,  were  to  receive  circumcision,  which 
was  the  mark  of  those  who  belonged  to  the  people  of  God,  or  which 
was  a  sign  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  his  people. 

IV.  The  name  church. — The  appellation  ixKlrj  ala  (or 
church)  without  any  adjunct,  occurs  1  Cor.  12:  28.  Eph.  1:22.  3: 
10.  Phil.  3:  6.  The  phrase  ixxlTjala  '&£ov  or  xov  '&sov  church  of 
God  is  applied  to  the  whole  christian  church  (1  Cor.  10:  32.  15:  9,) 
and  to  a  single  christian  church.  1  Cor.  11:  22,  16.  1:  2.  1  Tim. 
3:  5.  The  church  is  termed  "  church  of  Christ,"  ixxX^ala  X()ig- 
Tov,  in  Matt.  16:  18,  I  will  build  my  church.  Eph.  3:  21,  the 
church  in  (or  of  Jesus  Christ.  5:  23.  She  is  called  "  the  church  of 
God  and  Christ,"  or,  which  is  the  same  thing, "in  God  the  Father, 
and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  1  Thess.  1:  1,  and  2  Thess.  1:  1.  Of 
the  same  import  is  the  phrase,  "  the  churches  of  God  which  are  in 
Christ  Jesus,"  1  Thess.  2:  14,  where  iv,  which  corresponds  to  the 
Hebrew  h, ,  expresses  the  dative,  ecclesia  Christo  sacra,  i.  e.  ecclesia 
Christi.  Thus,  in  Jude  v.  1,  we  read  "the  Christians  xAt^zo/,  are 
dedicated  to  God  the  Father,  "  iv  '&6(o  natgl  i^yiaofiivot,  and  are 
preserved  for  Jesus  Christ,  i.  e.  they  remain  Christians  (belonging 
to  Christ.)  In  short,  Christians  are  here  termed  "  a  people  conse- 
crated to  God  the  Father,  and  Jesus  Christ."  Thus  the  words, 
(John  17:  11,)  Ttiotiaov  aviovg  iv  tm  ovofAaxl  gov  may  be  translated 
thus,  "  Preserve  them,  O  Father,  (as  thine)  for  thyself."^ 

On  the  philosophic  view  of  a  church  or  of  an  Ethical  Polity;  that 
is,  of  a  public  union  of  men  for  moral  purposes  under  a  moral  Law- 
giver and  Judge,  see  Kant's  Religionslehre,  1st  ed.  p.  123 — 134  ; 
Staudlin  "  Ueber  den  Begrif  der  Kirche,  und  Kirchengeschichte," 
in  the  Getting.  Theol.  Bibl.  Vol.  I,  p.  600—653 ;  and  StapfFer 
"  De  natura,  conditore,  et  incrementis  reipublicae  ethicae,"  Bern, 
1797,  Dissert.  1. 

On  the  insufficiency  of  mere  natural  religion,  for  the  foundation 
of  a  church  and  social  religious  worship,  see  Staudlin  "  On  the  pub- 
lic worship  of  natural  religion  ;"  "  Beitr'age"  to  the  philosophy  and 
history  of  religion  and  morality,  Vol.  I.  No.  VIII. 

V.  Subject  continued. — The  ancient  people  of  God  also  bore 

1  Dissert.  I.  in  Libros.  N.  T.  histor.  p.  89. 


486  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 


the  name  "  church  of  God,"  tKulriGia  [brjj^]  xvgiov.  Deut.  23:  2 
etc.  8.  Eckermann  remarks,  that  this  expression  has  a  peculiar 
force  in  Deut.  ch.  23,  because  the  context  relates  to  persons  who 
are  to  be  excluded  from  connexion  with  the  people  of  God  ;  and 
that  Paul  may  also  have  used  the  expression  (1  Cor.  1:  2.)  /xxA»?- 
oia  &iov  "  church  of  God"  with  an  emphatic  reference  to  the  in- 
cestuous person  (ch.  5,)  whom  he  pronounces  unworthy  to  be  a 
member  of  the  church.  From  this  ancient  people  of  God,  the  new 
people  originated.^  Hence  the  ancient  name  of  the  Israelites  de- 
scended to  Christians  or  the  new  people  of  God,  which  consists  of 
the  better  and  more  genuine  portion  of  the  Israelites  (Rom.  9:  6^ 
ov  navieg  ol  i^  'jagarjX,  ovtoi  'jGga7]X.  2:  28,  29,  o  iv  tm  itgvnKo 
*Jov8aiog — negiTO^ri  xugdiug,)  and  an  addition  of  Gentiles.^  Luke 
1:  32  etc.  he  shall  reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob.  Acts  15:  16,  I 
will  rebuild  the  tabernacle  of  David.  Phil.  3:  3,  we  are  the  cir- 
cumcision. Rom.  4:  11,  12,  16,  the  seed  of  Abraham  which  is  of 
faith.  Gal:  3:  29,  If  ye  are  Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed. 
All  these  appellations  are  figurative,  and  signify  the  new  people  of 
God,  which  was  prefigured  by  the  old.  Dissert,  de  notione  regni 
coelestis,  «§>  VI. 

VI.  The  church  is  called  "  the  people  of  God  and  of  Christ, 
Acts  15:  14,  a  people  for  the  name  of  God.  v.  17,  all  the  gentiles 
over  whom  the  name  of  God  is  called.  1  Pet.  2:  9  etc.,  ye  are  a 
holy  nation,  a  people  of  God.  1:  14,  as  obedient  children,  v.  15, 
16,  be  ye  holy  as  he  who  hath  called  you  is  holy.  Tit.  2:  14,  that 
he  might  purify  [consecrate]  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people.  1  Tim. 
3:  15,  in  the  house  of  God,  which  is  the  church  of  the  living  God. 
Heb.  3:  2,  3,  6,  we  are  the  house  of  Christ.  The  ancient  people 
of  God,  from  which  the  new  is  derived,  and  to  which  there  is  an 
evident  reference  in  Acts  15:  16.  1  Pet.  1:  16.  Heb.  2:  5,  also  re- 
ceives this  name.  Compare  2  Chron.  7:  14,  •'tt-,2;-«nj:3  '^u3^l  "^73^ 
l^rr^^  my  people  which  is  called  after  my  name,  with  Acts  15:  17, 
14';'"and  Ex.  19:  6,uJii|5  "^iil  tD-^aJib  ^^k'R'^.  ^  kingdona  of  priests 
and  a  holy  people,  with  1  Pet.  2:  9.  The  expression  oixog  nvglov 
the  house  of  the  Lord,  which  is  applied  to  the  new  people  of  God 
(1  Tim.  3:  15.  Heb.  3:  2 — 4,  6,)  is,  according  to  the  Alexandrian 
Codex,  used  by  the  LXX  (Deut.  23:  1,  where  the  Hebrew  is  blip 
{nn*^)  of  the  children  of  Israel ;  whereas  the  Vatican  Ms.  has  Ik- 
KltlGiav  nvgiov.     "  House  of  God"  or  "  people  of  God"  ohog  ^£0v 


1  Lake  24:  47,  KT^^vxd-^vai—eig  ndvta  ra  I'dvrjy  aQ^dfievov  dno  'IsQOvacdijfi 
should  be  proclaimed  among  all  nations  beginning  at  Jerusalem.  Rom.  11:  12 — 
24,  the  gentile  converts  are  called  dyQiiXaioe  iyxsvTQiO'&sls  £is  KoXUihuov .  15: 
27.'  Acts  15:  16. 

2  Eph.  2: 19,  Ovithi^evoi  xcd  ndQOMoi,  dU.d  avfino^ltat  xwv  dyUuv  iori  ye  are 
no  longer  guests  and  foreigners,  but  fellow  citizens  with  the  saints. 


«J  99.]  THE  CHURCH.  487 

— )Mog  ^eov  (comp.  Heb.  3  :  6 — 8  with  4  :  7 — 9)  are  synonymous, 
and  both  signify  "  the  family  of  God."  Of  similar  import  are  the 
following  expressions  of  the  Old  Testament. — 1 .  Ex.  4 :  23,  \^ 
•«nDn  Israel,  my  (God's)  firstborn  son. — 2.  Hos.  11:  1*  ''Da  my  son! 
—3:  Is.  1:  2—4,  D-tqa  children  of  God.  Deut.  32:  5,  6, 'he  is  thy 
Father. — 4.  Num.  12:  7,  n*:?  house.  In  v.  14,  God  calls  himself, 
Father  of  the  house  to  which  Moses  and  his  sister  Miriam  belong- 
ed.^— 5.  The  term  aycot  holy,  when  it  is  used  without  adjunct  (as 
2  Cor.  1:  1  and  1  Cor.  14:  33.  6:  1.  v.  4,— exjcAjyam),  signifies 
nothing  else  than  a  people  consecrated  to  God  and  Christ,  or  a  peo- 
ple of  God  and  Christ,  dyiaafie'vot  iv  Xqigim'/tioov  1  Cor.  1:  2. 
Comp.  Illust.  4  sup.  Thus  the  ancient  people  of  God  is  called  "a 
people  consecrated  to  God,"  (nin'^b  cilj^-D^  Ex.  19:  6.  Deut.  7: 
6.  and  14:  2,)  in  opposition  to  idolatrous  nations.^ 

VII.  The  true  church  worship  Christ. — Eph.  5:  24,  the  church 
is  subject  to  Christ.  Col.  2:  19.  1  Cor.  1:  2.  Comp.  «§>  42.  John 
10:  3 — 5,  14,1  am  known  of  mine.  v.  27,  my  sheep  hear  my  voice 
— and  follow  me.  It  must  indeed  be  admitted,  that  in  the  present 
jnixed  state  of  the  church  (<§>  105,)  this  sincere  adoration,  which 
can  alone  be  pleasing  to  Christ,  is  not  the  characteristic  of  every 
member  of  the  church.  But  each  Christian  ought  to  be  a  sincere 
worshipper  of  Christ,  and  all  would  be,  if  they  actually  were  what 
they  are  called,  if  they  all  were  true  Christians  or  genuine  members 
of  the  church.  And  with  regard  to  those  who  are  merely  nominal 
professors  of  Christianity,  one  object  of  the  institution  is,  that  they 
should  become  what  as  yet  they  are  not ;  that  in  this  nursery  of 
true  Christians  («^  105,)  they  should  be  trained  up  to  be  sincere 
worshippers  of  the  Lord  Jesus. 

Vllf.  The  church  is  under  the  special  protection  and  guidance 
of  Christ. — Eph.  1:  22,  and  constituted  him  head  over  all  things  to 
the  church.  This  relation  of  Christ  to  his  church  is  referred  to, 
when  his  guidance  of  the  church  or  people  of  God,  which  is  only  a 
part  of  his  government,  is,  by  way  of  distinction,  termed  "  his  reign" 
(Luke  1:  32,  33,)  and  the  church  itself  is  called  the  kingdom  or 
state  of  Christ,  the  descendant  of  David,  Acts  15:  16,  axtjvi^  Aavld 
the  tabernacle  of  David.  Col.  1:  13,  ^aatXala  tov  vlov  the  king- 
dom of  his  Son.^  (<§>  105.)  Thus  also  the  particular  government  of 
the  ancient  people  of  God,  which  is  only  a  part  of  the  universal  di- 
vine government,  is  called  the  "reign  of  God."  Matt.  21:  43.  And 
in  reference  to  Christ's  special  govd-nment  of  his  church,  the  church 
is  also  termed  "  the  body  of  Christ."  Eph.  1:  22.  Col.  1:  18. 
Comp.  <§»  96.  111.  4. 

1  Vide  Storr's  Comm.  on  Heb.  3:  2,  note  1. 

2  Vide  Dissert.  I.  in  Ep.  ad  Col.  not.  42. 

3  Vide  Dissert,  de  notione  regni  coelestis,  not.  77. 


488  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

In    "  Hess'  BIbliothek  der  hell.  Geschicbte,"    Pet.  II.  No.  I. 

On  the  subject  of  Theocracy,  the  true  idea  of  a  special  Providence, 
is  thus  determined  :  "  When  in  a  Hmited  sphere  of  action,  which  is 
within  the  extent  of  our  observation,  the  intentional  guidance  of  a 
higher  power  and  wisdom  is  manifest  in  a  higher  and  more  striking 
degree,  than  in  the  ordinary  course  of  events  ;  this,  whether  it  is 
connected  with  more  or  less  that  is  actually  miraculous,  is  termed 
*'  special  Providence." 

IX.  Subject  continued — Matt.  16:  18, 1  will  build  my  church. — 
28:  20,  1  am  always  with  you  ;  i.  e.  not  only  with  the  apostles,  but 
also  with  all  who  shall  learn  to  keep  my  commandments,  or  teach 
others  to  keep  them,  in  short  with  all,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
christian  church.^  Eph.  1:  22.  4:  15.  Coloss.  2:  19.  "By  which 
(head,  Christ)  the  whole  body  attains  a  glorious  growth,  because  it 
receives  strength  and  compactness  in  all  its  individual  parts."  Eph. 
5:  23,  he  is  the  Saviour  of  the  body.  29 — 32,  the  Lord  nourisheth 
and  cherisheth  the  church.  John  10:  14,  27,  28,  I  know  my  own 
— and  I  give  unto  them  eternal  life,  and  no  one  shall  wrest  them 
out  of  my  hand.  The  influence  of  Christ  is  of  course  bestowed  in 
different  degrees,  and  adapted  to  the  different  callings  and  necessities 
of  the  members  of  the  church.  Eph.  4:  7 — 12.  1  Cor.  12:  4,  and 
it  is  evident  also,  that  the  conduct  of  individual  members  of  the 
church,  may  incapacitate  them  for  the  reception  of  many  blessings, 
which  they  might  expect  of  Christ,  if  they  were  sincere  members  of 
the  church,  and  made  a  conscientious  use  of  the  privileges  which  it 
affords. 


SECTION    C. 

Origin  of  the  christian  Church  through  the  special  agency  of 

Christ.^ 

The  history  of  the  origin  of  the  Christian  church,  presents  striking 

1  This  is  evident  from  the  phrase  succeeding,  sojs  t^s  ovvtshias  rov  aiojvos 
until  the  end  of  the  world.  Thus,  Deut.  4:  25  etc.  eh.  30,  the  Israelites  are  fre- 
quently addressed  in  the  second  person,  when  such  things  were  spoken  of,  as 
concerned  the  whole  Jewish  nation  in  every  age.  This  figure  of  speech  is 
termed  communicatio  xo  Ivojg  ig^  and  by  it  the  speaker  embraces,  in  the  first  or 
second  person  plural,  all  of  the  same  nation  or  religion,  to  which  he  or  his  hear- 
ers belong.  John  7:  26,  22,  v/luv.  Acts  7:  53,  i^M^srs  ye  received ;  and  sometimes 
that  particular  part  of  a  whole  nation  which  does  not  belong  to  the  generation 
then  living.  John  6:  32.  ov  Mojvotjs  Sldojusv  vfxtv  Moses  did  not  give  to  you.  Vide 
Diss,  de  sensu  histor.  note  183,  where  other  examples  are  adduced. 


<§>  100.]  ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH.  489 

evidences(l)  of  the  fact,  that  Christ  exercises  a  particular  provi- 
dence over  her.  For,  he  is  the  Author  and  promoter  of  the  doctrines 
(2)  by  which  he  collects  and  preserves  his  worshippers,(3)  not  onlj 
because  he  commissioned  the  apostles  whom  he  himself  instructed, 
to  disseminate  the  doctrines  he  had  taught  them  ;  but  also  because 
he  endowed  them,(4)  and  other  members  of  the  new  church, (5) 
with  extraordinary  qualifications(6)  for  teaching ;  and  because  he 
even  substantiated  the  truth  of  his  doctrines  by  miracles.(7) 

Illustrations. 

I.  See  Dissert,  de  notione  regni  coelestis,  p.  31.  Opusc.  Vol.  I. 
p.  288.  Such  evidence  is  afforded  by  the  rapid  spread  of  Christianity 
throughout  the  Roman  Empire,  without  the  instrumentality  of  the 
jieast  violence. 

\    11.   Christ  is  the  Author  of  the  doctrines  taught  by  the  apostles.  ' 
—Acts  26:  23,  the  first  that  should  rise  from  the  dead,  and  should 
announce  a  light  unto  the  people  and  to  the  Gentiles.  Ephes.  2: 
17,  (Christ)  came  and  preached  peace  to  you  who  were  far  off,  and 
to  those  who  were  nigh.  2  Tim.  1:  10. 

III.  Malt.  13:  37  etc,  he  who  sowed  the  good  seed  (the  sons  of 
the  kingdom)  is  the  Son  of  man.  John  10:  16,  other  sheep — I  must 
bring  them. 

IV.  He  sent  the  Comforter. — John  16:  7.  14:  26,  mfiipo)  TiQog 
vfAoig  {ntfxxpet,  6  nait^Q  Iv  opOfAaii  fiov)  xov  7TaQrjxXt]T0v  1  will  send 
unto  you  (the  Father  will  send  in  my  name)  the  Comforter.  Acts 
26:  16.  Comp.  <§.  9,  10. 

V.  All  spiritual  shifts  come  from  Christ. — In  the  *'  New  Repert. 
for  Biblical  and  Oriential  literature,"  the  phrase  loyog  aocpiag  the 
word  of  wisdom  (2  Cor.  12:  8,)  in  comparison  with  the  expression 
eidti/at  (.waitigia  to  comprehend  mysteries,  (13:  2)  is  explained  as 
meaning  "  a  communication  of  unknown  truths,  made  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;"  and  \6yog  yvwoioig,  "  a  prudent  com- 
munication, well  adapted  to  the  circumstances  of  the  case."  Com- 
pare yvaiaig  I  Pet.  3:  7  and  2  Pet.  1:  5.  Both  these  phrases  are 
embraced  in  the  word  ugocpriziveiv  to  prophecy,  taken  in  its  more 
extensive  sense  (1  Cor.  14:  1 — 5,  6,)  for  in  this  sense  it  includes, 
in  general,  every  communication  of  truth,  which  presupposes  a 
special  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Both  of  these,  as  well  as  the 
other  spiritual  gifts  specified  (12:  8 — 10,)  were  of  supernatural 
origin. 

VI.  Subject  continued. — Eph.  4:  7 — 11,  having  ascended  on 
high,  he  gave  gifts  unto  men — and  he  appointed  some  apostles,  and 

62 


490  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IT. 

some  prophets,  and  some  evangelists,  and  some  pastors,  and  some 
teachers. 

VII.  He  substantiated  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles,  by  miracles, 
'■—John  14:  13  etc.  Acts  14:  7—10.  3:6.  9;  34.  16:  18.  Rom.  15: 
18.  Comp.  supra  ^J,  10.  111.  26,  27. 


SECTION    CL 

Multiplication  of  christian   churches,  and  the  care  of  the  apostles 

over  them. 

The  very  nature  of  the  christian  religion  led(  1 )  those  who  first 
embraced  it  to  form  themselves  into  an  associate  body.  But  as  an 
intimate  social  connexion  can  exist  only  among  persons  of  contig- 
uous residence,  the  natural  consequence  was  that  distinct  churches 
were  formed  in  the  different  sections  of  the  country. (2)  And  the 
apostles  by  divine  authority, (3)  sanctioned  these  societies,  and 
superintended  the  administration  of  their  affairs.  (4) 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  nature  of  Christianity  social. — Christianity  requires  love 
and  unity  among  her  children  (John  13:  34  etc.  Eph.  4:  3 — 6,  16  ;) 
social  edification  by  conversing  together  on  the  things  of  the  king- 
dom (5:  19.  Col.  3:  16,)  by  good  works  (Matt.  5:  13—16,)  and 
finally  also  by  a  public  profession  of  religion  (Matt,  10:  32.  Mark  8: 
38.)  Hence,  the  natural  consequences  of  these  requisitions  were, 
separation  from  those  who  rejected  Christianity,  and  a  more  inti- 
mate connexion  among  the  Christians  themselves.  See  <§>  108  inf. 
See  Reinhard's  system  of  Practical  theology,  <§>  306.  p.  311,  313. 

II.  Individual  churches  formed. — Acts  2:  41 — 47.  Description 
of  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  8:  1.  Other  particular  churches  are 
mentioned,  with  or  without  their  location.  1  Thess.  2:  14.  Gal.  1: 
22.  1  Cor.  1:  2.  4:  17.  11:  16.  16:  1,  19. 

III.  Matt.  16:  19.  Comp.  ^  90.  111.  19  supra. 

IV.  The  apostles  superintended  the  Churches. — Acts  2:  38 — 42. 
4:  32 — 35.  6:  2 — 4.  15:  22.  It  is  evident  from  all  these  passages, 
that  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  every  thing  was  conducted  under 
the  direction  of  the  apostles.  Acts  15:41.  16:  4  etc.  Paul  travelled 
through  several  churches,  taught  in  them,  and  made  various  arrange- 


^  102.]  CHRIST  PROTECTS  THB  CHURCH.  491 

ments.  Ch.  19:  9.  Paul  collecled  the  new  converts  and  gave  them 
instructions.  1  Cor.  7:  17,  oviojg  iv  xalQ  iyxXr^aiaig  ndcaatg  SiaraG' 
<yo/Matthus  do  I  ordain  (direct)  in  all  the  churches.  2  Cor.  11:  28, 
«J  fAigtfxva  naaaiv  toyp  inxXtjaici)v  anxiety  for  all  the  churches.  Comp. 
Heb.  10:  24  etc. 


SECTION    CII. 


Institution  of  the  ministerial  office. 

As  it  was  the  design  of  our  Lord  that  Christianity  should  be  pre- 
served on  earth  until  the  end  of  the  world,(l)  and  be  gradually (3) 
extended  by  means  of  instruction  ;(2)  the  apostles,  in  obedience  to 
this  divine  purpose, (4)  issued  their  general  injunction,  that  the  first 
teachers  should  qualify  others  for  the  duties  of  that  station, (5)  and 
that  the  ministerial  office  should  be  of  perpetual  standing.(6)  They 
moreover  made  specific  declarations  by  v^^hich  they  promoted  the 
settlement  of  ministers  in  particular  congregations. (7) 

ILLUSTRATIONS. 

I.  Perpetuity  of  the  church.— Matt.  13:  30,  until  the  harvest,  v. 

39 43,  47 — 49.  Until  the  separation  of  the  good  and  evil  at  the 

end  of  the  world,  there  shall   be  a  church  of  Christ,  consisting  of 
good  and  bad.  Matt.  28:  20.  Compare  ^  99.  111.  9. 

II.  The  church  to  be  extended  by  instruction. — Matt.  28:  20. 
didaaxovieg  avrovg  x.  r.  A,  teacliing  them.  John  17:  20,  nfgl  tmv 
ntaifvaovTojp  dia  tov  loyov  aviojv  igojiw  I  pray  for  those  who  shall 
believe  through  their  word  (doctrine  or  preaching.)  Luke  8:  11, 
the  seed  is  the  word  of  God,  6  Xoyog  '&€0v.  Eph.  4:  12,  tdcotie 
IxQiGxog)  didaaxakovg—icg  or^odo(xt]v  tov  ow^iatog  Xgiaiou  Christ 
appointed  some  teachers— for  the  edification  of  the  body  of  Christ. 
1  Pet.  1:  23  etc.  2:  2.  ^       ^      j   u 

III.  Matt.  13:  31—33,  the  parables  of  the  mustard  seed  and  the 

leaven. 

IV.  Bishops  or  ministers  appointed  by  the  apostles.— Eph.  4: 
10  etc.  see  111.  2.  and  ^  100.  HI.  6.  Acts  20:  28,  vf^ag  ro 
Tfvfvua  TO  aywv  t^exo  emaxonovg,  noiiiaiveiv  ttjv  6xxj7?omi/  rov 
eeofthe  Holy  Ghost  hath  appointed   you   overseers  (bishops)  to 

feed^the  church  of  God.  o  t^-       o    o 

V.  These  are  commanded  to  ordain  others.— Z   lim.  4..  a^ 


492  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  ir. 

ccf]itovGag  nuQ  ifiov^  Tctvicc  nagd&ov  niaioJg  av&gcjnoig,  oaivig 
IkuvqI  I'oQvtai,  xal  tztgovg  dida^ui  the  things  which  you  have  heard 
of  me,  commit  to  faithful  men,  who  shall  be  able  also  to  instruct 
others. 

Eph.  4:  11,  12,  ido)xe  (Xgiaiog)  didaaxuXovg,  ngog  lov  najugtia- 
f.wv  tmv  ayiwv,  6ig  egyop  diciKOvia.g  Christ  aj3pointed  teachers,  for  the 
perfecting  (improvement)  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry. 

VI.  Perpetuity  of  the  ministerial  office. — Eph.  4:  12,  13.  In 
this  passage,  the  phrase,  tgyov  diaxoi/lag  the  work  of  the  ministry, 
for  which  certain  Christians  were  from  time  to  time  to  be  prepared  ; 
is  mentioned  as  the  means  to  be  used  elg  otnodofitjv  lov  oM^aiog 
tov  XgtoTov  for  the  edification  of  the  body  of  Christ,  until  the 
church  of  God  shall  have  attained  a  state  of  perfection  in  the  future 
world.  See  «§>  62.  111.  18. 

VII.  The  apostles  directed  that  ministers  should  be  located. — 
Acts  20:  17.  (corap.  with  v.  28)  ngsa^viegoi — iniaxonoi,  Comp. 
111.  4.  14:  23,  /f«^0T0i/>i<7arrf$  {TluvXog  xal  Bagva^ag)  ngia^vit- 
govg  xar*  ixxXtjalav  Paul  and  Barnabas,  ordained  them  elders  in 
every  church.  Tit.  1:  5,  Paul  directs  Titus  to  ordain  elders  or 
presbyters  in  the  towns  of  Crete.   1  Tim.  3:  1 — 5.  5:  17.   1  Thess. 

_5:  12.  etc.  Gal.  6:  6,  7.  Heb.  13:  17.  These  passages  enjoin  res- 
pect and  obedience  to  the  elders  or  ministers  of  the  churches. 


SECTION     CIII. 


Even  in  those  instancesj  in  which   the  agency  of  Christ  in  the 
government  of  his  church,  is  not  manifested  by  any  extraordinai 
acts,  that  agency  nevertheless  is  exerted. 

By  these  arrangements  (^  100  and  seq.,)  provision  was  made 
for  the  preservation  and  extension  of  Christianity,  so  that  such 
extraordinary  and  striking  acts  of  Christ  (§  100,)  as  were  required 
for  the  formation  of  christian  societies(l)  and  the  establishment  of 
the  ministerial  office,  (Eph.  4:  11)  should  no  longer  be  necessary; 
but  that  Christianity  should  of  itself,(2)  make  a  progress(3)  which, 
though  not  so  strikingly  apparent(4)  to  its  teachers  and  friends, 
should  nevertheless  be  uninterruptedly  advancing.  Yet(5)  Christ 
does  not  leave  the  church  to  herself,  even  in  our  days  ;(6)  but  car- 
ries on  his  work  in  the  hearts  of  men  (^  114,)  and  by  virtue  of  his 


<§>   103.)  CHRIST  PROTECTS  THE  CHURCH.  493 

government  over  all  things  (Matt.  28:  18.  <5>  96,)  overrules  also 
external  circumstances(7)  for  the  good  of  his  church ;  even  those 
which  seem  detrimental  to  her  interests. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Miracles  wrouirht  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  the  churches. 
— Acts  2:  6 — 43.  The  miracle  on  Whitsunday,  after  the  perform- 
lance  of  which  three  thousand  persons  received  Christianity.  Acts 
14:  4.  (comp.  3,  10  etc.)  The  great  multiplication  of  Christians  in 
consequence  of  the  miracle  of  healing  the  lame  man  wrought  by 
Peter.  Acts  5:  11 — 16.  The  great  influence  which  the  miracles  of 
Peter  (the  death  of  Ananias  and  his  wife,  the  healing  of  the  sick 
•etc.,)  had  on  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  and  of  the  surrounding 
country.  Acts  8:  6 — 17.  The  founding  of  a  church  in  Samaria  by 
the  miracles  of  the  apostle  Philip.  Acts  14:  3.  Miracles  of  Paul 
and  Barnabas  in  Iconia.  Acts  19:  10 — 20.  Miracles  of  Paul  at 
Epliesus,  the  consequences  of  which  are  thus  described  (v.  20): 
ovroi  xara  y.gazog  6  koyog  tov  xvqIov  riv6.avs  xat  tax^fv  thus  mightily 
idid  the  word  of  God  increase  and  prevail.  Rom.  15:  18  etc. 
ixaietgyaauTO  XQtaiog  di  ifiov  fig  vnaxotjv  Id^voiv,  loyco  xal  tgyta^  ip 
^dvvdfiio  a7]f.i£i(oi>  y>al  legaKov  Christ  wrought  by  me  to  make  the 
Gentiles  obedient,  by  word  and  deed,  by  the  power  of  signs  and 
wonders. 

II.  Mark  4:  28,  avtOfiat?]  »J  ytj  xagnoifogeT  the  earth  bringeth 
forth  fruit  of  herself.  Comp.  v.  26,  omwg  iatlv  ?J  ^aaiXtla  zov 
<^€ov  thus  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven  (the  church  of  Christ.") 

III.  This  is  proved  by  the  prarable  of  the  mustard  seed  which 
[gradually  grew  up  to  be  a  large  tree  Matt.  13:  32 — and  of  the 
little  leaven  which  gradually  leaveneth  the  whole  lump  v.  33. 

IV.  Mark  4:  27,  "  the  seed,  unobserved  by  the  husbandman, 
sprang  up  and  grew  to  be  a  large  tree." 

V.  Just  as  the  expression  "of  herself  or  spontaneously,  auro- 
fiocirj  (Mark  4:  28)  does  not,  according  to  Michaelis'  own  confes- 
sion, exclude  the  influence  of  the  weather  and  other  similar  circum- 
stances, but  only  indicates,  that  the  seed  which  was  deposited  in  the 
earth,  possessed  a  power  to  bring  forth  plants  corresponding  to  the 
seed,  and  to  produce  something  which  the  utmost  exertion  of  the 
sowers  could  not  effect,  and  which  they  at  first  could  not  even  per- 
ceive ;  in  like  manner  also  does  the  apodosis  or  application  of  this 
parable,  ascribe  to  divine  truth,  the  seed  of  which  is  committed  to 
the  soil  of  the  human  heart,  an  intrinsic  power,  which,  of  itself, 
unobserved  by  others,  effects  a  salutary  change  in  those  who  re- 
ceive it,  without  thereby  denying  that  the  efficacy  of  this  truth  is 


494  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

augmented  in  various  ways  by  divine  providence.     1  Cor.  3:  6  etc. 
^  115. 

VI.  Matt.  28:  20.  §  99.  111.  9.      ^ 

VII.  1  Cor.  3:  21 — 23,  navxa  vf.ia}v  taitv — (xoff|MO?,  ^w>J,  ^ctva- 
rog,  iffOT^ta,  fiAkovza)  vfAUQ  di  Xqiotov  all  things  are  yours  (the 
world,  life,  death,  things  present,  things  future)  and  you  are  Christ's. 
Rorn.  8:  28  etc.  §74.  HI.  1. 


SECTION    CIV. 


Notwithstanding  all  the  adversity  which  the  church  has  to  encoun- 
ter, site  is  nevertheless  under  the  uninterrupted  guidance  of 
Christ. 

The  frequent  adverse  incidents  of  an  internal  or  external  nature, 
to  which  the  church  is  exposed,  are  not  evidence  either  of  incapac- 
ity or  inattention  in  her  Ruler.  For,  precisely  such  adversity  also 
befel  her  in  those  days,  when  God  exerted(l)  himself  in  her  de- 
fence, in  an  ocular  manner,  and  demonstrated  by  miracles,  that  he 
did  not  want  power(2)  either  to  repel  the  assaults  of  his  enemies, 
or  to  counteract  the  influence  of  the  unworthy  members  of  his 
church.  But  if  the  church  of  Christ  was  to  be  established  on  this 
earth, (3)  if  she  is  to  continue  and  to  increase(4)  as  long  as  the  pres- 
ent state(5)  of  mankind  lasts,  and  if  the  purity  and  multitude  of  her 
members  are  to  be  augmented  by  the  conversion  and  accession  of 
such(6)  as  were  formerly  inimical  to  her  interests  and  oppressive  to 
her  comfort  and  disgraceful (7)  to  her  character — then  neither  death, 
0  taxciTog  i^^Qog  the  last  enemy  (1  Cor.  15:  26.)  and  the  mortality 
of  the  human  family, (8)  nor  the  other  enemies  and  obstacles  by 
which  the  peace  of  the  church  was  disturbed,  can  possibly  be  imme- 
diately removed.(9)  But  in  due  time, (10)  when  it  shall  be  accor- 
dant with  the  divine  purposes, (11)  they  will  doubtless  be  removed, 
and  Christ  shall  rule  with  undisputed  sway  over  all  his   prostrate 

(12)  foes.     But  even  now  he  does  rule  in  the  midst  of  his  enemies. 

(13)  He  restrains(14)  their  power,  when  necessary,  and  overrules 
their  iniquitous  machinations  to  the  prosperity  of  the  whole,(15)  or 
to  the  benefit  of  individual  members(16)  of  his  church. 


^  104.]  CHRIST  PROTECTS  THE  CHURCH.  495 


Illustrations. 

I.  The  church  formerly  defended  hy  miracles, — Acts  13: 8 — 11. 
Elymas  the  magician  who  opposed  Christianity  suddenly  became 
bhnd,  at  the  rebuke  of  Paul.  Acts  5:  19  etc.  An  angel  opens  the 
prison  for  the  apostles.  12:  16  etc.  An  angel  leads  Peter  out  of  the 
prison.  5:  1 — 11,  The  sudden  death  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira.  1 
Cor.  11:  30 — 32.  Diseases  at  Corinth,  in  consequence  of  the  abuse 
of  the  Lord's  Supper.  1  John  5:  16,  dfiagtia  ngog  Oavaxov  a  sin 
which  brought  a  mortal  disease  on  the  transgressor.^  James  5:  15. 
At  the  com:-:cncement  of  the  christian  church,  the  first  Christians 
were  sometiirss  punished  for  great  crimes  by  extraordinary  diseases; 
but  if  those  sins  were  not  sins  unto  death,  dfiaQtiat  ngog  S^dpaiov, 
they  could  be  cured  by  those  who  possessed  the  gift  of  healing 
sicknesses,  by  means  of  the  prayer  of  faith.^ 

II.  Acts  18:  10,  fyco  ii^t  furu  gov,  xal  ovdtlg  in(,d^ii](JSTal  coc  tov 
xa'Moaai  at  I  am  with  you,  and  no  one  shall  lay  hold  of  you  to  hurt 
you.  Thus  saith  Christ  to  Paul  at  Corinth.  1  Cor.  5:  3 — 5. — 
Paul  was  resolved  by  the  authority  of  Christ  to  inflict  a  mortal  dis- 
ease (nagudovvoti  t(o  aaiava^)  on  the  incestuous  person,  even  in  the 
assembly,  in  which,  though  absent  himself,  he  would  work  by  the 
power  of  Christ,  ovv  z^  dvvd^et  tov  xvgtov  7](iwv  'JrjOovXgtaiov, 

III.  Matt.  13:  38,  o  aygog  iaiiv  6  xoof^og  the  field  is  the  world. 

IV.  Matt.  13:  31— 33.  Eph.4:12. 

V.  Matt.  13:  49,  o  i^^fgcafiog  n  GvpzeXtla  tov  aiojvog  ioTtv  the 
harvest  is  the  end  of  the  world,  comp.  28:  20. 

;  VI.  Gal.  1:  13,  etc,  the  conversion  of  Paul,  wHo  had  persecuted 
'the  church.  Eph.  ch.  2,  Conversion  of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  in 
general.  Tit.  3:  3,  ^f^tv  nois  dvori^ov,  dmidelg,  nXavwfiivot  x.  r.  A. 
for  we  were  ourselves  sometimes  foolish,  disobedient,  deceived  etc. 
1  Pet.  2:  12.  Exhortation  to  lead  such  a  life  that  the  Gentiles 
might  be  gained  over  to  Christianity  by  it,  'ha  do^daojoi  lov  ftov 
tv  TjfAtga  imoxontjgthsii  they  may  glorify  God  in  the  day  of  visita- 
tion [retribution,]  3:1,2.  Christian  wives  may  by  their  conduct 
gain  over  their  husbands  who  are  not  Christians.  2  Tim.^  2:  25, 
firinOTs  dui  6  dtog  To7g  dvTidiatcOsfAivoig  fiSTavotccv  dg  iniyvmaiv 
ccXrjdfiag  perhaps  God  will  give  repentance  to  the  opposers,  to  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  truth.  2  Cor.  13:  10,  ttJp  Hovalav  tdcoxt' 
fiot  6  icvgiog  dg  ohodofinv  the  Lord  gave  to  me  authority  for  edifi- 
cation. 


1  Vide   Dissert,   concerning  the  Spiritual   Gifts  N.  Repert.  Pt.  3,  p.  317  etc. 
Where  this  version  is  defended. 

2  Vide  Dissert,  de  sensus  historico,  p.  8.  Opusc.  Vol.  I.  p.  10. 
Vide  Diss,  in  Epp.ad  Corinth,  Note  181.  "• 


y 


496  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

VII.  1  Thess.2:  14  etc.  2Thess.  1:4,  6.  1  Cor.  16:  9.  iJohn 
2:  18—26.  4:  1—6.  1  Cor.  3:  17.  Gal.  5:  9  etc.  15.  2  Cor.  12: 
20  etc.  Eph.  4:  25.  5:  18.  1  Thess.  5:  14.  2  Thess.  3:  11—15. 
1  Tim.  3:  3—5,  8,  10.  5:  11—15,  24.  Tit.  1:  6  etc.  2:  3—5.  10, 
15.  In  these  passages  are  mentioned  persecutors,  opposers,  false 
teachers,  and  seducers,  and  sins  and  offences  of  every  kind,  among 
those  who  were  at  the  time  brethren.  Matt.  13:  41,  av^.Xe'iovoiv  in 
fijg  ^aaiXeiag  avzov  ndpia  zd  axdpdaXa  xal  rovg  ttoiovvtccQ  ttJv 
dvofxiav  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all  seducers  and  ini- 
quitous persons. 

VIII.  If  true  Christians  ceased  to  be  mortal,  they  could  no  lon- 
ger live  on  this  earth  and  let  the  light  of  their  example  shine  before 
other  men.  They  could  no  longer  gjcoaTfjgeg  iv  noafuM  thai  be 
lights  in  the  world  (Phil.  2:  15  etc.,)  and  Xdfineiv  tfi-nQOO'&tv  twv 
ctpf^QWTiMv  shine  before  men  (Matt.  5:  16,)  nagaxaleTv  exhort 
(Heb.  10:  25,)  imoxonelv,  take  care  (Heb.  12:  15.)^ 

IX.  Otherwise,  those  wicked  must  also  be  removed,  who  will 
yet  reform  and  become  ornaments  of  the  church  f  and  thus  would 
much  wheat  be  weeded  out  with  the  darnel.  Matt.  13:  29. 

X.  1  Cor.  15:  26,  ioxatog  ix&QOQ  xaTagyeltac -OdvaTog  the  last 
enemy  that  shall  be  destroyed  is  death.  Matt.  13:  40 — 43.  49  etc. 
The  wicked  shall  at  the  end  of  the  world,  be  banished  from  the 
kingdom  of  God.  2  Thess.  1:  5—10.  Comp.  ^  61,  97.  111.  3. 

XL  Christ  has  nothing  to  fear  from  the  enemies  of  the  church  in 
regard  to  his  own  dignity  ;  although,  for  important  reasons,  he  does 
not  choose  to  make  them  feel  his  power  more  sensibly  at  present. 
Therefore,  although  the  subjection  of  all  things  to  Christ  is,  as  yet, 
only  partial,  it  by  no  mean  follows  that  it  shall  not  be  perfect  here- 
after. 

XII.  Matt.  22:  43  etc,  xditov  ix  dt^mv  ftov,  ecog  dv  ^ta  tovg 
ix^govg  gov  vTionodwv  tMvnodMv  gov  sit  at  my  right  hand,  until  I 
make  thy  enemies  thy  footstool.  Comp.  Dissert,  de  notione  regni 
coelestis,  <^  V. 

XIII.  Psalm  110:  2,  T'a^fi^  a^jpa  rri-)  rule  thou  in  the  midst  of 
thine  enemies.  Consult  the  Commentary  on  Heb.  5:  5.  Note  Jc, 
where  the  arguments  are  stated  which  prove  that  the  ]  10th  Psalm 
refers  not  to  David  but  to  Christ.^ 

1  See  Commentary  on  Heb.  on  the  two  last  passages,  Notes  p  and  y.  Comp. 
§  65.  III.  5.  3  Comp.  §  24.  Illust.  6. 

3  [The  principal  arguments  from  which  it  is  evident  that  this  Psalm  refers  to 
the  Saviour,  are  the  following. — 1.  The  express  declaration  of  Jesns  himself,  in| 
his  conversation  with  the  Pharisees,  recorded  in  Matt.  22:  42 — 45.  This  testimony  i 
must  be  decisive  to  every  true  believer  in  the  divinity  of  the  Saviour,  to  every  1 
Christian.  But  supposing  for  a  moment,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  had  hot  decided 
the  point  in  question,  and  that  the  application  of  the  psalm,  must  be  ascertained 
from  other  circumstances  j  we  should  be  led  to  the  same  result  by  the  subsequent 


^  104.]  CHRIST  PROTECTS  HIS  CHURCH.  497 

XIV.  Jesus  restrains  the  power  of  his  enemies  when  necessary, 
— It  is  evident  from  the  downfall  of  the  Jewish  state,  that  Christ 
can  restrain  the  power  of  his  enemies,  in  other  ways  than  by  such 
extraordinary  acts  as  are  related  in  111.  1.  That  event  answered  a 
determinate  object  for  Christ ;  as  is  evident  from  the  prophecies  by 
which  it  was  foretold.  In  the  prophecy  Matt.  16.  28,  Jesus  refers 
to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  from  which  those  of  the  apostles 
who  were  then  living,  should  infer  the  efficiency  of  his  dominion  ;i 
and.  Matt.  10:  23,  ewg  av  tXOri  6  vtog  xov  av{^g(6nov^  the  judgment 
inflicted  on  those  haters  of  Christianity,  the  Jews,  is  represented  as 
the  reappearance  of  Christ.  Apology  for  the  Revelation,  p.  336. 
And  in  Matt.  23:  34  etc,  1  Thess.  2:  1 5  etc,  Christ  declares  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  be  the  punishment  of  the  persecutors  of 
Christians.  Compare  «5>  39.  111.  5.  This  destruction  of  the  Jewish 
state,  was  to  be  a  proof,  that,  although  Christ  may  not  immediately 
come  to  the  aid  of  his  people,^  although  he  may  not  punish  his 
enemies  instantly  ;  he  nevertheless  observes  their  conduct,  and  in 
due  time  will,  by  political  changes,  or  some  other  means,^  frustrate 
their  designs. 

XV.  Jesus  overrules  the  machinations  of  his  enemies  for  the 
good  of  his  church, — This  we  find  exemplified  in  the  following 
instances,  which  are  stated  in  the  Acts  of  the  apostles,  8:  1.  (comp. 
4 — 40.)  The  persecution  of  the  Christians   in  Jerusalem  gave  rise 

considerations. — For,  II.  This  psalm  was,  as  far  as  we  know,  universally  be- 
lieved, in  and  before  the  time  of  Christ,  to  be  the  production  of  David.  But 
David'  could  not  possibly  speak  the  language  of  this  psalm  and  allude  to  him- 
self; hence  it  is  agreed,  that  if  the  psalm  docs  not  refer  to  the  Messiah,  David 
could  not  have  been  its  author  ;  for  no  personage  existed,  who  bore  to  him  the 
relations  called  for  by  the  psalm.  But  the  Jewish  nation  who  lived  1800  years 
nearer  the  time  of  David  than  we,  were  certainly  better  judges  of  the  historical 
iiUeslion,  Who  was  its  author?— III.  The  Jews  in  the  days  of  our  Saviour  be- 
lieved that  this  psalm  referred  to  the  Messiah.  This  is  evident  from  Matt.  23: 
4(5_IV.  The  Jewish  writers  themselves  formerly  explained  it  as  referring  to 
the  Messiah.— V.  Although  -jnb  priest,  may  signify,  in  general,  a  person  who 
has  special  access  to  the  King  or  to  God  ;  it  cannot  be  proved  that  this  appella- 
tion  was  ever  given  to  an  individual,  merely  because  he  was  resident  m  the  vi- 
cinity of  the  king  or  of  the  sanctuary.  Hence  the  residence  of  David  on  Mount 
Zion  near  the  t'emple,  could  not  justify  its  application  to  him,  as  some  have 
contended.— VI.  The  personage  who  is  described  as  "^nb  priest,  in  the  4th  verse, 
is  in  the  same  verse  declared  to  resemble  Melchisedeck  :  but  it  was  a  peculiarity 
of  that  ancient  king  of  Salem,  that  ho  was  not  only  king,  but  also  at  the  same 
time  priest  of  the  Most  Hicrh  ;  which  was  absolutely  prohibited  to  the  later 
occupants  of  Mount  Zion.— VII.  The  6th  and  7th  verses  are  irreconcilable  with 
the  supposition,  that  the  psalm  refers  to  David.  As  the  illustration  o\  this  his- 
torical  argument  would  require  considerable  detail,  we  refer  the  reader  to  the 
work  of  Dr.  Storr.     S.] 

1  Vide  Dissert,  de  notione  regni  coolestis,  p.  10  etc.  Opuscul.  Acad.  Vol.  I, 
p.  2G1  etc. 

2  May^Qo^vatX,  i.  e.  ^^aS^vec  {dvafihac)  ''  he  tarries  with  reference  to  tho 
righteous:"  3  See  New  Apol.  for  Rev.  p.  308-334. 

63 


498  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK. 


IV. 


to  the  spread  of  Christianity  in  Samaria,  and,  according  to  11: 19 — 
26,  in  Phoenicia,  Cyprus,  and  Antiochia.  21:  27.  ch.  28.  The 
captivity  of  Paul  afforded  him  an  opportunity  to  defend  and  pro- 
mote Christianity  in  Jerusalem  and  Rome,  23:  11.  Phil.  1:  12.  2 
Cor.  4:  8 — 15,  6  f-iit^  {^dvaiog  Iv  r^yuv  liegyeiTut^  ij  de  ^(oij  iv  vytiv — 
navTu  dl  vf^ag  as  then  death  worketh  in  us,  but  life  in  you — all 
things  for  you.  12:  9,  "  The  Lord  said  unto  me.  Your  weakness 
places  the  efficacy  of  my  power,  which  works  through  you,  in  so 
much  the  stronger  hght,"  ij  dvva^ug  (aov  if  da^tviiq.  leXecovzctt. 
Dissert,  in  Epp.  ad  Corinth.  Note  153. 

XVi.  1  Pet.  1:  6,  7,  iVa  i6  do'AifJuov  Ttjg  ntarecog  vfimv — ivga&i^ 
*^  Your  sufferings  serve  as  a  trial  of  your  faith."  3:  14,  h  xa« 
ncta^ons  did.  dixaioovftjv,  inaxdgioi  and  if  ye  suffer  for  righteous- 
ness' sake,  blessed  are  ye.  4:  12  etc.  2  Tim.  2:  11  etc.  Comp.  <^ 
23. 


SECTION  CV. 

The  commixture  of  good  and  bad  in  the  Churdt  does  not  justify  us 
in  seceding  from  it. 
Even  at  the  very  commencement  of  the  christian  church,  wer 
find  that  some  persons,  who  were  not  sincerely  attached  to  Chris- 
tianity, could  nevertheless  give  it  an  ostensible  reception  (Matt.  13: 
23  etc.  V.  19 — 22.)  The  example  of  their  friends  and  relations,  or 
tlie  power  of  the  amazing  miracles  which  were  wrought,  or  the  in- 
fluence of  some  other  motives  may  have  induced  them  to  make  a 
profession  of  Christianity. (I)  Children  whose  parents  were  true 
Christians,  although  they  were  educated  in  the  Christian  religion,. 
may  easily  have  been  of  a  character  unlike  that  of  their  parents^ 
(Eph.  6:  4.)  And  especially,  in  the  course  of  time,  when  the  pro- 
fession of  the  religion  of  Jesus  was  connected  rather  with  advantage 
than  detriment,  many  would  assume  the  name,  who  reflected  no 
honour  on  the  cause.  (2)  But  this  mixture  of  unworthy  members, 
(3)  ought  not  to  deter  those  of  better(4)  character  from  connexion 
with  the  church.  Because,  although  others  may  undervalue(5)  the 
means  for  the  promotion  of  growth  in  grace  (6)  and  happiness, 
which  the  christian  church  affords,(7)  they  have  it  in  their  power 


^  105.]  GOOD  AND  BAD  IN  THE  CHURCH.  499 

to  make  a  conscientious  and  profitable  use  of  them.  Moreover,  the 
Head  of  the  church  can  easily  distinguish  between  his  true  worship- 
pers, and  those  who  disobey  the  precepts  of  his  Gospel. (8)  Finally, 
the  worthy  members  of  the  church,  even  if  they  should  be  a  minor- 
ity (Rev.  3:  4,  2,)  can,  not  only  counteract  the  influence,  which 
their  connexion  with  the  nominal  Christiaus  might  have  on  their 
piety  ;(9)  but  they  can  and  ought  to  strive  to  promote  true  piety 
among  others.  <§>  104  and  78.  In  the  present  life,(10)  the  church 
(o '&f/^ihog  Tov  ^aou  2  Tim.  2:  19,  comp.  Not.  3,)  embraces  not 
only  those  who  are  true  Christians,  but  such  also  as  are  yet  to  be 
led  on  to  piety.  {^Ovo^a^ovot,  to  ovofAu  avgiov  2  Tim.  2:  19,  comp. 
Matt.  7:  21,)  {dnoaiiivac  ano  ddiaiag  2  Tim.  2:  19.)  The  church 
is  therefore  not  only  a  society  of  Christians,  but  also  a  nursery  in. 
which  true  Christians  are  to  be  formed. 

Illustrations. 

I.  Even  in  the  apostolical  church,  there  were  some  merely  nomi- 
nal Christians. — John  2:  23  etc,  many  believed  in  him  because 
they  saw  his  miracles  ;  but  he  would  not  trust  himself  into  their 
hands,  because  he  well  knew  them  all."  6:  70  etc.  f^  vfiwv 
(dojdtxa)  ilg  dvoc^olog  eaicv  of  you  twelve,  one  is  a  devil.  Acts  8: 
13,  (comp.  21 — 23,)  Simon  the  magician  believed  on  account  of 
the  miracles. 

II.  John  2:  23,  ttoXXoI  inlaTevaoiv  stg  to  ovofxcc  aviov  many  be- 
I  lieved  in  his  name.     Comp.  with  6:  64,  tlalv  i^  vfitap  ttveg^  oi  ov 

matevovaiv  there  are  some  among  you  who  do  not  believe  with 
sincerity.  1  John  2:  19,  i'i  rt^(ov  I'^tj^Oov,  dU*  ovx  ^aav  tl  yjfiuiv 
they  went  out  from  us,  but  they  were  not  of  us.  Thus  also  had  the 
ancient  people  of  God  genuine  and  spurious  members.  Rom.  9:  6» 
2:  28  etc.  ^  ,      ,  ^        , 

III.  Matt.  13:  27 — 30,  aq)£t6  avvav'idveadat  afzqiOTsga  [to  xaXov 
cniQua  aal  td  ^i^dvia)  (JitxQ('  ^ov  {^egcofiov  let  them  both  (the  good, 
grain  and  the  darnel)  grow  together  until  the  harvest.    Compare  y. 

38 43.  22:10 — 14,  awnyocyop  ndi^Tag,  novi^govg  ts  xai  dya'&ovg 

they  collected  all,  the  good  and  the  bad.  2  Tim.  2:  20,  iv  f^fyd^v 
ohla(y,  19,  TftJ  'QBfjiiVojtov  &£0v.  1  Tim.  3:  15,  q/kw -^fou,  vtiS 
iatl'v  ixitkrjola  {teov  Cwvtog)  tatv  axevr],  d  fiiv  6ig  Tifir,v,  adiuj 
dtifilav  in  a  large  house  (the  foundation  of  God— the  house  of  God,, 
that  is,  the  church  of  the  living  God)  there  are  vessels,  some  to 
honour  and  some  to  dishonour. 

IV.  Existence  of  unworthy  members,  no  ground  for  secession. — 


500  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.   IV. 


The  farther  a  person  has  advanced  in  piety,  the  more  lively  is  the 
sense  which  he  has  of  the  longsufFering  which  he  himself  needed 
(Tit.  3:  3—5,)  and  which  he  still  requires.  (Phil.  3:  12  etc.  Gal. 
6:  4  etc.)  And  (comp.  ^  24.  111.  6)  under  the  influence  of  this 
sense  of  his  own  imperfections,  he  will  feel  a  greater  henevolence 
for  his  fellowmen,  and  be  the  more  willing  to  bear  with  the  faults  of 
others.  Tit.  3:  2  etc,  vnofiiftvrjoxs  avrovg,  tJvat,  aindxovs,  inietxe7g 
— ngog  navxag  dv&goiTiovg,  iifAiv  yap  nois  xai  i^(Aeig  dvorixoi  k.  t,  X. 
put  them  in  mind  to  be  no  brawlers,  but  gentle — unto  all  men,  for 
we  also  were  ourselves  foolish  etc.  Gal.  6:  1 — 4.  1  Cor.  13:  4, 
7}  dydntj  ficcxgo&vfieJ,  xoriaiaviTOLL — ov  (fvatoviai  (v.  7,)  ndvia 
Gttyit, — TidvTa  vnofii'vfi  love  bears  every  thing,  believes  and  hopes 
the  best,  and  if  her  hope  is  not  immediately  realized,  she  awaits  its 
fulfilment  with  patience." 

V.  Matt.  13:  19 — 22,  6  anagelg  nagd  rtjif  odov — imid  nizgMdrj 
— iig  Tag  dytdv^aghe  that  received  the  seed  by  the  way  side — on 
rocky  places — among  the  the  thorns. 

VI.  Matt.  13:  23,  o  inl  ttjp  yrjp  rijv  xaXtjv  anccgflg — 6g  Si 
^agnocpogel  he  who  received  it  upon  good  ground — the  same  bring- 
eth  forth  fruit. 

Vil.  These  means  of  grace  are,  instruction  from  the  word  of 
God,  and  reciprocal  communication  of  thoughts  and  feelings,  which 
render  our  knowledge  of  Christianity  more  firm,  complete  and 
practical.  1  Pet.  2:  2.  Eph.  4:  12,  15  etc.  Col.  2:  2.  Heb.  10:24. 

VIII.  The  Lord  knoweih  them  that  are  his.— 2  Tim.  2:  19,  22, 
lyvci)  Kvgvog  rovg  ovxag  avtov  {rovg  InLKaXovf-iivovg  top  tcvgiov  ex 
xa&agdg  xagdiag)  the  Lord  knoweth  those  who  are  his  (who  call 
upon  the  Lord  out  of  a  pure  heart.)  Rev.  1:  13,  ddov  Iv  fxtaco  tcop 
imdkvxvicov  (i.e.  ixx?yt]ai6jp  v.  20)  of^otov  vU^  civ{fg(anov  I  saw  in 
the  midst  of  the  seven  candlesticks  (i.  e.  churches)  one  like  unto  the 
Son  of  man.  *'  Jesus  is  intimately  acquainted  and  connected  with 
the  seven  churches  ;  he  dwells  in  the  midst  of  them,  has  charge  of 
them,  and  knows  their  excellencies  and  defects."^  2:  2  etc.  9,  13, 
19,  olda  rd  i'gya  aov  I  know  thy  works,  v.  23 — 25,  iy(o  eifit,  6 
igavvMv  vecpgovg  xal  xagdlag  (compare  3:  4)  I  am  he  who  searches 
the  reins  and  hearts. 

IX.  Necessity^  of  church  discipline. — 2  Tim.  2:  21,  idu  tig 
txxu&dori  laviov  dno  xovxoyv^  taiai  axsvog  fig  xi^riv  if  any  one  purge 
himself  from  these,  he  shall  be  a  vessel  unto  honour.  But  although 
it  is  impossible  entirely  to  prevent  the  occurrence  of  snares  (offen- 
ces Luke  17:  1  ;)  they  are  to  be  avoided  as  much  as  possible,  for 
Paul,  when  speaking  of  the  incestuous  person,  tells  us  that  a  little 
leaven  leaveneth  the  whole  lump  (1  Cor.  5:  6,  fttxgd  ^v^rj  oXov  to 
q>ugafAa  ^ufiol  ■^)  and  Christ  reproved   the  pastors  or  angels  of  the 

1  Vide  New  Apology  for  the  Revelation,  p.  312  etc. 


I  ^  106.]  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  A  GENUINE  CHURCH.  501 

churches  of  Pergamus  and  Thyatira,  for  tolerating  certain  seducers. 
Rev.  2:  6,  14,  20.  Nevertheless,  every  individual  Christian  is  to 
beware  lest  he  arrogate  to  himself  an  authority  which  belongs  only 
to  the  church,  and  not  to  individuals.  1  Cor.  5:  2,  13.  The  in- 
cestuous person  was  condemned,  not  by  an  individual,  but  by  the 
majority  of  the  church  members  (who  coincided  w^ith  Paul  in  opin- 
ion ;)  and  Paul  says  (2  Cor.  2:  6,)  Sufficient  unto  such  an  one  is 
the  punishment  which  was  inflicted  by  many."  Let  no  one  make 
encroachments  on  the  regulations  of  the  church,  but  1  Cor.  14:  33, 
40)  let  all  things  be  done  decently  and  in  order.  11:  16.  There 
are  indeed  certain  measures  which  an  individual  may  take,  such  as 
exhortation  {vov^mlv  1  Thess.  5:  14.  2  Thess.  3:  15)  and  shun- 
ning intercourse  with  unworthy  members  of  the  church  (^»J  avvctva- 
(ilyi/vo&aL  V.  14.  1  Cor.  5:  9 — 11  ;)  but  those  measures  must  not 
be  taken  in  an  irregular  manner  (Matt.  7:  6.  Eph.  5:  16.  comp. 
Col.  4:  5  and  v.  6,)  or  at  an  unseasonable  time,  or  in  such  a  way 
as  shall  interfere  with  the  jurisdiction  of  the  civil  government.  The 
civil  government  is  now  so  intimately  interwoven  with  the  church, 
that  we  cannot  judge  every  thing  by  the  standard  of  the  ancient 
christian  church,  which  had  no  connexion  \yith  the  government  of 
the  state,  and  therefore,  could  have  more  efficient  internal  regula- 
tions, without  being  in  danger  of  interfering  with  civil  liberty  and 
rights. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  church  to  counteract  all  evils  as  far  as  possi- 
ble, and,  in  short,  to  conduct  all  things  as  circumstances  may  dic- 
tate, so  that  their  measures  may  not  entail  greater  evils  on  the 
church  whose  prosperity  they  were  intended  to  subserve.  Thus, 
Paul  advises  the  restoration  of  the  incestuous  person,  because  he 
feared  that  its  procrastination  might  lead  some  to  slander  his  charac- 
ter, by  which  means  Satan  would  strive  to  alienate  the  affections  of 
the  people  from  him,  and  thereby  from  Christ. 

X.  In  the  future  world,  the  church  will  attain  the  state  for  which 
she  was  intended,  namely,  that  of  entire  'purity  and  perfection. — 
Eph.  5:  27.  4:  13.  §  104.  111.  10.  §  62. 


SECTION    CVI. 


Furity  of  christian  doctrine,  is  a  characteristic  of  the  genuineness 
of  the  christian  church. 
As  the  christian  religion  is  preserved   and  extended  by  instruc- 
tion ;  the  purity  of  any  individual  church,  i.  e.  the  degree  of  her 


502  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

proximity  to  the  character  of  a  perfect  church,(l)  must  be  judged 
of  by  the  conformity  of  the  doctrines  (1  Cor.  3:  10)  which  she 
professes,  to  the  doctrines  of  Christ  and  his  apostle5.(2)    «5>  9 — 11. 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  purity  of  churches. — Everj'  church  is  worthy  of  the 
name  of  a  christian  church,  just  in  proportion  to  the  degree  of  her 
obedience  to  Christ  and  his  doctrines.  Eph.  5:  24.  Compare  <5>  99. 
And  her  obedience  will  be  perfect,  in  proportion  as  she  adheres  to 
Christ  and  his  doctrines  in  her  faith  and  practice.^  But  it  may 
happen  in  a  church  whose  doctrines  are  more  conformable  to  the 
doctrines  of  Christ  than  those  of  another,  there  may  be  fewer  mem- 
bers whose  lives  are  conformed  to  the  will  of  Christ,  than  in  the 
other  whose  doctrines  are  more  adulterated.  For,  the  members  of 
the  latter  church  may  use  those  true  doctrines  which  they  have  re- 
tained, for  their  advancement  in  holiness  and  happiness  ;  and  by 
these  truths  may  counteract  the  pernicious  influence  of  the  errors 
which  they  have  adopted.  The  erroneous  opinions  of  their  church 
may  have  been  merely  treasured  in  their  memory  ;  without  having 
influenced  their  understanding  or  impressed  their  heart,  and  there- 
fore will  have  no  influence  on  their  conduct.  Or,  it  is  possible  that 
on  some  points  they  have  abandoned  the  publicly  acknowledged 
doctrines  of  their  church.  For,  it  is  not  necessary  for  a  member  to 
recede  from  a  church  on  account  of  every  deviation  from  her  public 
standards  of  doctrine,  as  long  as  such  deviation  is  tolerated  when 
known  (as  it  ought  to  be,)  and  does  not  compel  its  subject  to  de-  j 
clare  that  which  is  not  true. 

Michaelis  says,^  "  If  a  perfect  coincidence  of  all  the  opinions  of 
all  the  members  of  a  church  were  required,  we  should  eventually 
have  as  many  churches  as  heads,  that  is,  no  church  at  all. — The  er- 
rors of  individuals  do  not  injure  the  other  members  of  a  church,  and 
by  continued  instruction  in  their  assemblies,  they  may  be  reclaimed 
from  their  errors."^ 

But,  although  the  worthy  members  of  an  adulterated  church  are  of 
far  higher  estimation  (Luke  13:  29.  Acts  10:  34)  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Lord  of  the  church,  than  those  members  of  a  church  of  purer  doc- 
trines who  abuse  the  advantages  afforded  them,  and  are  consequent- 
ly subjected  to  greater  responsibility  (Luke  12:  47  etc.  13: 26 — ^28. 
Matt.  7:  21—23,  26.  Rom.  2:  5,  9,  13;)  still,  the  abstract  excel- 
lence, of  a  church  is   proportionate  to  the  actual  purity  of  her  doc- 

1  Col.  2:  6—10.  Comp.  111.  2.  and  Niemeyer's  Popul.  and  Practical  Theol.  p. 
357.  2  Dogrnatik,  p.  678/631—683. 

3  Schwab  De  jure  Protestantum  examinandi  rel.  suam,  §  40 — 43. 


>   107.]  CHARACTER  OF  THE  TRUE  CHURCH.      *  503 

rines ;  because  the  church  of  the  greatest  doctrinal  purity,  offers 
ler  members  the  best  means  of  acquiring  a  christian  disposition  and 
character,  and  thereby  of  attaining  a  higher  degree  of  blessedness- 
§63.) 

But  should  we  attempt  to  institute  an  accurate  comparison,  we 
luist  compare  the  conscientious  members  of  a  purer  church,  witb 
he  better  individuals  of  a  less  pure  church  ;  and  from  the  latter 
;ubtract  also  every  thing  good,,  for  which  they  are  indebted,  rather 
0  their  deviation  from  the  received  doctrines  of  their  church,  thaa 
;heir  adherence  to  them. 

II.  Matt.  28:  19  etc.  diSaaxovifg  t^jqhv  ndi/ra  oaa  ivfTeiXufiijv 
v^ut^  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  which  I  have  commanded' 
fow.  John  17:  20,  oi  maxevovieg  did  lov  loyov  avicov  etg  ifit  those 
vvho  shall  believe  on  me  through  their  teaching.  Col.  2:  2,  3,  6 — 
10,  (og  nagsld^sre  tov  'itjaovv  Xqigtov  top  xvgiov,  iv  uvt(o  nfQtna-^ 
:£lz£ — ^s§atov(xi:vov  iv  trj  niaifc,  Kad^o]g\adLdd)(^{>riTs  as  ye  have  re- 
ceived Jesus  Christ  the  Lord,  walk  in  him — established  in  the  faith. 
as  you  have  been  taught. 

Eph.  2:  20,  inoixodofirj&avieg  inl  toj  -O^ffieklco  tmv  dnoGToXwv  xae 
noo(pf]Twi/,  (ivTog  dx^okopialov  aviov  Jriaov  Xqigtov  being  built  up- 
on the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  being 
(himself  the  chief  corner  stone.  Gal.  1:  7 — 9.  5:  7 — 10.  Tit.  li 
13  etc. 


SECTION  CVII. 


The  duty  of  the  church  to  provide  orthodox  ministers. 

Since  therefore,  it  is  so  highly  important,  that  the  doctrines  of  a 
christian  church  should  coincide  with  the  doctrines  of  Christ ;  it  is 
the  duty  of  every- ecclesiastical  body,(l)  above  all  things,  to  watch 
(2)  those  to  whom  the  instruction  of  the  church  is  committed,  and 
see  that(3)  their  doctrines  are  conformable  to  the  doctrines  of  Christ, 
(4)  [and  that  their  conduct  corresponds  with  his  precepts(5).] 


Illustrations. 


I.  The  very  idea  of  a  society  implies,  that  every  thmg  which 
affects  the  common  good  of  a  church,  should  be  transacted  by  the 
church,  as  a  whole.     This  was  acknowledged  even  by  the  apostles 


604  OF  THE  REDEEMER.  [bK.  IV. 

themselves,  although  they  had  received  of  the  Lord  special  injunc- 
tions, and  also  peculiar  authority  to  direct  the  affairs  of  the  church. 
Matt.  16:  19.  Comp.  <§>  9.  111.  9.  John  20:  23,  av  tivcov  aq^is 
{x(;ar^zf)  Tag  dfiaQilag  whose  sins  soever  ye  reoiit,  etc.  Vide  Mori 
JEp.  Theol.  Christ,  p.  288,  where  it  is  asserted  that  these  words  re- 
fer to  the  apostles  alone.  1  Cor.  5:  4.  (^  104.  111.  2.)  2  Cor.  10:  8. 
13: 10. 2:  9.  10:  6.  For  they  commanded(Acts6:  2—6)  the  church 
to  elect  certain  persons  who  should  attend  to  their  domestic  con- 
cerns, dtai^oveiv  xganri^mg ;  and  Paul  directs  the  church  of  Corinth 
to  cast  out  the  incestuous  person  themselves  (1  Cor.  5:  2,  13)  2 
Cor.  1:  24,  ovx  otv  nvgievofisv  vfdcjv  itjg  nlaztwg  I  am  so  far  from 
governing  you  tyrannically,  who  have  received  my  doctrine,  vixwv 
t(av  niatfvovTcov  etc.  But  the  church  had  authority  to  commit  to 
the  charge  of  particular  Christians,  the  administration  of  part  or  of 
all  the  concerns  of  the  community  (Tit.  1:  5,)  as  circumstances 
might  dictate.  Hence,  in  countries  where  church  and  state  are 
united,  they  have  a  right  to  commit  this  trust  into  the  hands  of  a 
christian  government,  which  is  already  bound  as  a  civil  body  to 
watch  lest  the  ordinances  of  the  church  should  prove  prejudicial  to 
the  state,  or  abridge  the  civil  liberties  of  its  subjects.  1  Pet.  2:  12 
— 17.  4:  15.  Rom.  13:  1 — 10.  (In  the  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis 
nXiigojfAu  <5>  XIII.  it  is  proved  that  the  latter  passage  refers  to  the 
duties  of  a  citizen  toward  his  government,  as  well  as  toward  his 
fellow  citizens.) 

II.  It  is  the  sacred  duty  of  the  church  to  watch  over  the  ortho- 
doxy of  her  ministers, — By  virtue  of  this  obligation,  it  is  the  duty 
of  the  church,  to  adopt  all  necessary  measures,  so  that,  as  far  as  the 
number  of  the  applicants  for  the  sacred  office,  and  the  imperfect 
state  of  the  churches  will  possibly  admit,  such  teachers  be  selected 
as  not  only  themselves  adhere  to  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  but  also 
are  able  to  teach  and  defend  them.  The  apostle  Paul  expressly 
says  to  Titus,  ch.  1:  7,9  Jel  iniaxonov  [ngfa^uTegov  v.  5)  sivai — 
«i'r«/0|Uf»'Oi/  Tov  xaza  ttjp  didaynv  niazov  Xoyov^  'ivu  dvvaiog  -fj  xal 
TtagaxaXfTv  Iv  irj  dtdaaxah'ff  ztj  vyiuivovGi^,  y.al  xovg  ccviiXtyovtag 
iki'yx^^^  ^  bishop  (i.  e.  elder)  ought  to  hold  fast  the  faithful  word 
(doctrine,)  as  he  has  been  taught,  that  he  may  be  able  (to  confirm 
his  hearers  in  the  sound  doctrine)  by  sound  doctrine  both  to  ex- 
hort and  to  convince  the  gainsayers.  Of  Timothy  he  requires  that 
a  bishop  should  be  didaxiiy.6v,  apt  to  teach.  2  Tim.  2:  24,  2,  and  j 
in  Tit.  2:  7,  8  he  tells  Titus  to  be  nage/Ofievug  koyov  vyiri  dxaid-  I 
yvMGiov  "  to  teach  unadulterated  and  true  doctrines  in  an  unobjec-  | 
tionable  manner  (with  dignity.")  ! 

It  is  further  the  duty  of  the  church,  so  soon  as  any  of  her  minis-  l 
ters  are  convicted  of  leading  their  churches  off  from  the  true  doc- 
trines  of  Christianity,  and  of  teaching   things   contrary  to   sound 


^107.]  ORTHODOXY  OF  MINISTERS.  505 

doctrine  (1  Tim.  5:  19,)  earnestly  to  warn  them  (2  Tim.  2:  24  etc.) 
against  every  such  deviation.  1  Tim.  1:  3,  -naQuyyuXriq  rial  fttj 
he^odidaanaXeJf  that  you  might  charge  some  not  to  teach  other 
(false)  doctrines ;  and  finally,  if  they  will  not  be  reclaimed  by  mild 
and  friendly  representations,  to  depose  them  from  the  ministry. — 
For,  however  proper  it  is  for  a  church  to  tolerate  persons  who  enter- 
tain opinions  differing  from  their  own;  the  case  is  materially  chang- 
ed with  regard  to  those  who  are  not  contented  to  enjoy  their 
opinions  in  private,  or  to  converse  about  them  in  a  modest  manner 
as  private  individuals;  but  who,  under  the  cloak  of  an  authorized 
public  ministry,  endeavours  to  impose  upon  their  hearers,  contrary 
to  their  will,  or  even  without  their  detecting  it,  doctrines  different 
from  those  which  their  church  professes,  and  which  "they  expected 
to  be  taught.  The  apostle  says,  Gal.  5:  12,  oqeXov  ajioy.oipoviac 
ot  OLvaaracovvTitg  v/nccg  [Tccgaoaoi^ieg — {)tXovTfg  ^eiaGiQtipat  to  ivay 
ytXiov  xov  d^ov  V.  9.  1:  7.)  "  may  those  who  disturb  you  by  en- 
deavouring to  obtrude  circumcision  upon  you,  be  cut  off  from  your 
church  (and  be  treated  like  those,  spoken  of  Deut.  23:  1,  who 
were  not  permitted  to  come  into  the  congregation  of  the  Lord."^) 
And  Ej)h.  4:  14,  be  no  more  children,  tossed  to  and  fro  and  carried 
about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine  by  the  sleight  and  cunning  crafti- 
ness of  men. 

If  heterodox  ministers  are  permitted  to  retain  their  opinions,  and 
reject  the  received  doctrines  ;  why  should  not  a  church  also  enjoy 
their  opinion,  and  rid  themselves  of  such  teachers  ?  I  admit  it  pos- 
sible that  those  who  depart  from  the  public  standard,  may  have  the 
more  correct  opinions,  that  though  they  are  considered  to  be  in 
\  error,  truth  may  be  on  their  side  (2  Cor.  6:  8) — I  admit,  that  for 
this  very  reason,  it  is  the  duty  of  those  to  whom  the  care  of  the 
church  is  committed,  and  who  are  qualified  for  the  investigation, 
impartially  to  weigh  the  truth  and  importance  of  the  disputed  doc- 
trine ;  and  if  it  be  found  true,  to  incorporate  it  with  the  acknowledg- 
ed standard  ;  or  if  it  seem  doubtful  which  of  the  opposite  opinions 
is  more  correct,  to  leave  the  adoption  of  either,  optional  with  the 
ministers  of  the  church.  But  as  it  is  equally  possible  that  a  minis- 
ter, who  believes  his  opinions  more  correct  than  the  doctrines  of  the 
acknowledged  standard,  and  who  has  had  address  enough  to  succeed 
in  raising  his  character  and  extending  his  influence  among  the  peo- 
ple, may  nevertheless  entertain  doctrines  truly  pernicious  to  a  Chris- 
tian church  (1  Cor.  3:  17  etc;)  it  does  not,  on  that  account,  be- 
come the  duty  of  those  who  have  the  charge  of  the  church,  to  view 
such  a  person  as  a  new  and  great  light  risen  amongst  them,  because 
he  considers  himself  as  such.     Nor,  if  they  believe  his  doctrmes 


1  Dissert.  De  sensu  vocis  §ixaios,  §  xix.  in  fine.  Rom.  16:  1/. 

64 


506  OF  THE  CHUKCH.  [bK.  IV. 

dangerous,  are  they  bound  to  suffer  the  members  of  their  church  to 
be  tainted  by  them,  and  led  astray  into  dangerous  errors.  If  the 
judges  have  been  influenced  by  passion,  or  have  decided  with  pre- 
cipitancy, God  will  call  them  to  account  for  the  negligence  and 
criminality  of  their  conduct ;  and  to  this  God  ought  those  who  suffer 
unjustly,  with  christian  confidence,  to  commit  their  cause.  But  no 
society  could  retain  any  rights  if  we  should  take  from  them  every 
privilege,  which  passion  and  prejudice  may  sometimes  abuse  to  the 
detriment  of  individuals.  Hence,  a  christian  society  has  a  right  to 
reject  a  minister,  whose  ministrations  they  believe  to  be  detrimental 
to  the  primary  objects  of  the  association :  although  their  judgment 
may  be  erroneous,  and  his  doctrines  more  agreeable  to  the  Bible, 
which  they  themselves  desire  (*§>  106)  to  follow,  than  their  own 
opinions  are.  But  those  who  reject  the  divinity  of  Christ,  are  in 
truth  not  Protestants  ;  for  it  is  essential  to  the  character  of  Protest- 
ants, that  they  not  only  reject  all  human  authority,  but  more 
particularly,  that  they  receive  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  the  only  and 
the  infallible  criterion,  by  which  they  are  to  judge  doctrines  and 
ministers,!  nay,  they  are  not  even  Christians  :^  for  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  divine  authority  of  Christ,  is  essential  to  the  character 
of  a  Christian.  Such  persons  are  at  liberty  to  pursue  their  own 
opinions,  and  if  they  are  desirous  of  being  teachers  of  a  church 
which  rejects  Christ,  they  may,  in  countries  which  tolerate  such 
churches,  collect  disciples  who  desire  a  teacher  of  this  cast.  2  Tim. 
4:  3.  But,  to  undermine  the  dignity  of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  under  the  deceitful  mask  of  a  Christian  and  Protestant 
minister,  and  to  receive  for  his  treacherous  attempts  to  demolish  the 
very  pillars  of  Christianity  and  Protestantism,  a  salary  which  is  ap- 
propriated only  for  their  preservation  and  defence,  which  can  be 
merited  only  by  ministers  who  are  labouring  (Tit.  1:  9)  to  accom- 

1  Comp.  BOscliing's  General  Remarks  on  the  Symbolical  Books,  §  4  etc. 

[2  The  Unitarianism  of  this  country,  and  the  Neology  of  Europe,  are,  in  their 
cardinal  features,  the  same  ;  and  the  position  taken  by  Dr.  Miller,  in  his  Letters 
on  Unitarianism,  is  precisely  similar  to  that  here  maintained  by  our  author.  In 
Letter  VIII,  pp.  284,  285,  we  find  the  following  remarks  : — "  If  they  (Unitarians) 
reject  every  fundamental  (distinguishing)  doctrine  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  they, 
of  course,  reject  Christianity  ;  if  they  reject  Christianity,  they  surely  are  not 
Christians  J  their  congregations  evidently  ought  not  to  be  called  churches,  nor 
their  ordinances  be  considered  as  valid. — I  have  said,  that  Unitarians  ought  to 
be  considered  and  treated  as  Deists  in  disguise.  I  beg  that  this  language  may  not- 
be  misconstrued.  It  is  by  no  means  my  intention  to  intimate,  for  I  do  not  be- 
lieve, that  Unitarians  are,  as  a  sect,  a  set  of  hypocrites  ;  that  they  profess  one 
thing,  and  really  believe  another. — But  my  meaning  is,  that,  while  they  assume, 
and  insist  on  retaining  the  christian  name,  their  creed  really  does  not  differ 
much,  in  substance,  from  that  of  serious  Deists.  Now  if  this  be  the  case,  and  if 
the  fact  that  they  are  substantially  Deists,  be,  in  effect,  concealed  from  popular 
view  by  the  name  which  they  bear,  what  is  this  but  being  Deists  under  the 
christian  name,  in  other  words,  Deists  in  disguise  ?    S.] 


§   107.]  ORTHODOXY  OV  MINISTERS.  507 

plish  that  object  (1  Cor.  9:  7—11.  1  Tini.  5:  17  etc.  Gal.  6:  6,) 
and  which  traitors  and  enemies  to  the  cause  can  never  with  good 
conscience  accept ;  this  I  say  is  a  course  of  conduct,  of  which  no 
man  of  honour,  no  conscientious  man,  will  suffer  himself  to  be  guilty. 

III.  The  qualifications  requisite  for  the  ministry, — As  it  is  the 
will  of  Christ,  that  teachers  should  be  placed  over  the  churches 
(^  102,)  and  as  he  has,  through  his  apostles,  determined  the  quali- 
fications of  such  teachers  as  he  approves  (1  Tim.  3:  2 — 7.  2  Tim. 
2:  24  etc.  Tit.  1:  5 — 9.  1  Pet.  5:  2;)  all  ministers  who  possess 
those  qualifications,  must  be  pleasing  to  the  Lord  of  the  church, 
although  they  were  not  appointed  immediately  by  himself,  but 
regularly  inducted  into  the  sacred  office  by  the  church,  or  by  those 
to  whom  the  care  of  the  church  is  confided.  In  these  qualifications, 
are  included,  not  only  doctrinal  knowledge  and  a  capacity  to  teach, 
but  also  and  principally,  true  piety,  a  character  and  conduct  confor- 
mable to  the  doctrines  and  precepts  of  our  Saviour.  Matt.  5:  19, 
og  Tiovriari  ttal  didd'§rj  (f-iiuv  imp  IvtoXmv  xomtav  rcov  iXa)^iaTCov^) 
ovTog  fii'y'ag  xXrj&rjGerac  iv  rrj  ^aatXeia  xmv  ovquvmv  whosoever  shall 
practise  and  teach  even  the  least  of  these  commandments,  the  same 
shall  be  highly  esteemed  in  the  reign  of  heaven.  1  Tim.  3:  2 — 4, 
del  TOP  inloxonov  aveniXrimov  {dve'yidrjTOv  Tit.  1:  7  etc.)  flvat  x.  r.  A. 
a  bishop  ought  to  be  blameless.  The  good  or  bad  example  of  the 
teacher  has  undeniably  a  very  important  influence  (Matt.  5:  13 — 16. 
1  Tim.  12:  16.  Tit.  2:  7.  1  Pet.  5:  3 ;)  and  his  instructions  are 
powerfully  enforced  by  a  conscientious  and  exemplary  life.  Tit.  2:  7, 
nctgaxoiisvog  Iv  i^  dida'Aalia  ddiaqjdogiuVy  ae^ivoiriTa  "  showing  in 
his  instructions,  an  incorruptible  love  to  truth  and  virtue  ;  together 
with  zeal  and  dignity."^  For,  although  integrity  of  character  alone, 
is  not  sufScient  to  enable  a  man  to  discharge  the  duties  of  the  min- 
isterial office,  in  a  manner  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God  ;  still,  those 
who  possess  the  ability  to  teach,  will  be  less  inclined  to  detract 
from  the  sanctity  of  Christ's  commands,  in  proportion  to  the  zeal 
with  which  they  are  pursuing  holiness  themselves.  Matt.  5:  19  etc. 
The  dinaioovvri  vj\-nch  Jesus  required  of  his  disciples,  consisted 
partly  in  their  fulfilling  all  the  moral  precepts  of  God  themselves 
{noitJGcct,)  and  partly  in  a  conscientious  and  unreserved  manner  of 
teaching  them  to  others  {dM^at.)  These  two  are  intimately  con- 
nected with  each  other ;  just  as  the  laxer  morality  of  the  Pharisees 
was  connected  with  their  neglect  of  certain  duties  of  life.  (Dissert. 
I,  in  locos  N.  T.  histor.  p.  21  etc.)  Matt.  7:  16—20,  every  good 
tree  yieldeth  good  fruit,  and  every  evil  tree,  evil  fruit.  They  will, 
moreover,  adhere  to  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  with  the  greater 
and  more  conscientious  firmness,  and  they  will  be  the  less  m  danger 
__^ ■ - — — 1 

•  Vid.  Dissert.  inEpist.  Pauli  Minores,  p.  54.  Comp.  ch.  I.  II, 


508  OF  THE  CHURCH.  [bK.'iV. 

of  sacrificing  any  particular  doctrine  to  the  favour  of  their  contem- 
poraries who  deny  it,  in  proportion  as  they  have  a  love  for  the  truth, 
and  reverence  for  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.     And  the  more  solicitous 
they  are  for  the  salvation  of  their  own  souls  and  the  souls  of  others, 
the  greater  progress  Will  they  make  in  the   investigation  of  truth, 
and  in  their  capacity  for  instructing  others.  1  Tim.  4:  15,  16.    This 
zeal  for  the  salvation  of  our  own  souls  and  those  of  others,  is  very  i 
necessary  to  the  conscientious  discharge  of  the  various  duties  of  the  j 
sacred  office.     He  who  strives  to  profit   by  the  christian  "^doctrines  , 
himself,   and  to  conform  his  principles  and  conduct  to  them,  will  j 
thus   become  acquainted  with  his  own  heart,   and  be  the  better ' 
qualified  to   recommend  a  christian  character  to  others,  and  to  urge 
them  to  attain  jt.     But  as  the  good  and  bad  are  so  generally  mixed, 
throughout  the  world,  it  is  not  to   be  expected,  that  a  sufficient 
number  of  pious  clergymen,  who  are  at  the  same  time  apt  to  teach, 
can  always  be  found.     Nor  could  those  who  are  truly  good,  always 
be  distinguished,  even  if  they  did  exist  in  sufficient  numbers. — 
( TiPMv  av&QuiKav  at  dfiagzlat  ngodrjXol  fioi  some  men's   sins  are 
manifest.)     But  we  should  remember,  that  the  doctrines  of  Christ, 
although  taught  by  a  man  who  neglects  the  improvement  and  con- 
sequently the  salvation  of  his  own  soul,  if  (Matt.  7:  22)  they  are 
taught  in  their  purity,  have  by  virtue  of  their  own  power,  a  very 
salutary  influence  on  inquiring  souls.    Phil.  1:  15 — 18,  nXi^v  navtl 
zqonio,  €iTf  ngo(fciG€i,  she  dXf]&£ia,  Xgtaiog  xarayyeUeTat  <*  in  either 
case  Christ  is  preached,  whether  it  be  with  a  sincere  or  insincere 
intention."  Matt.  9:  36.   10:  4  (comp.  Luke  9:  1  etc.)  And  among 
the  Twelve  whom  Jesus  sent  forth  to  preach  the  Gospel,  was  Judas 
the  traitor.  Comp.  John  6:  64,  70,  etc.    We  must  not  forget  that  it 
is  the  duty  of  an  audience  to  observe,  not  who  is  the  teacher,  but 
what  is  taught.  Matt.  23:  3,  navxa  oau  dv  huwov  {ol  ygafifiateTg  aal 
0aQt(ja7oi)  v^7v  zriQaiv^  xrjQtiie  xal  noielzi'  x«ra  da  xd  egya  ccvxmv  [ii] 
7iotf7r6  whatsoever  they  (the  Scribes  and  Pharisees)  enjoin  you  to^ 
observe,  observe  and  do  ;  but  follow  not  their  example.  ';  j 

IV.  Orthodoxy  essential  in  the  ministry. — Tit.  1:  9.  Comp.| 
111.  2.  1  Tim.  4:  6.  6:  3  etc,  ngogtgxeo&at  vyiuivovai  Xoyoig  xo7g\ 
rovxvgiov  i^fiwv'lrjaov  Xgiarov  (a.  minister  must)  consent  to  the 
wholesome  words  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  And  2  Tim.  1:  13 
etc,  vnoxvncDGtv  t'xs  vytatvopxwv  loymv  hold  fast  the  form  of  sound 
words.  From  those  who  do  not,  the  apostle  commands  his  son 
Timothy  to  "  withdraw  himself."  1  Tim.  6:  5. 

V.  [Piety  requisite  in  the  minister  of  the  cross.  John  3:  3. 
Unless  a  man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God.— 
1  Cor.  2:  14.  "^Pux^yiog  de  dv&gwnog. — The  natural,  the  unregene- 
rate  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  for  they  are 


^  107.]  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR  THE  MINISTRY.  509 

foolishness  unto  him :    neither  can  he  know  them,  for  they  are 

spiritually  discerned.     Luke  6:  39.  And  he  spake  a  parable  unto 

them,  Can  the  blind  lead  the  blind  ?  Shall  they  not  both  fall  into 
the  ditch  ?] 


> 


THE    SACRAMENTS. 
BAPTISM  AND  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


SECTION  CVIII. 


Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  are  among  the  appointed  means  j 
for  the  preservation  of  the  christian  church. 

It  is  evident  from  the  two  ordinances,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  which  Christ  himself  instituted,  that  it  was  not  his  inten- 
tion that  Christians  should  dwell  in  seclusion  and  be  separated  from 
each  other,  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  their  duty  to  live  in  the 
utmost  possible  intimacy.  (Michaelis  Dogmat.  p.  602.)  The  first 
was  instituted  as  an  ordinance  for  the  solemn  reception  of  persons 
into  the  number  of  his  disciples,  or  initiation  into  the  christian 
church  ;  (1)  and  the  other  as  a  means  to  promote,  and  solemnly  to 
promulgate  the  permanent  union  of  Christians.  (2) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Baptism  is  the  initiatory  ordinance. — Matt.  28:  19,  fi(f&7]- 
tevGuTS — ^ami^ovTsg  go  ye  and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  (b;^) 
baptizing  them  in  the  name  etc.  Eph.  4:  4  etc.  iv  aoifta  xal  £v 
nvevfia — ev  ^amiGfia  one  body  and  one  spirit — one  baptism.  Acts 
2:  41,  i^aTtvla&rjaap  xal  ngoasTi&Tjoav  were  baptized  and  added 
Comp.  with  V.  47,  o  tcvgiog  ngoatTid-ei  iri  ixxXrjaia  the  Lord  added  \ 
to  the  church. 

II.  The  eucharist  is  intended  to  promote  the  union  of  Christians 
and  give  publicity  to  it. — 1  Cor.  10:  17, 18.  "Just  as  those  who 
belong  to  the  same  house  and  are  subject  to  the  same  father,  also 
partake  of  the  same  bread ;  so  also  do  Christians  by  partaking  ; 
of  the  same  bread  in  the  Holy  Supper,  evince  that  they  all 
belong  to  the  family  of  the  same  God,  and  are  brethren  and 
partners  in  the  faith.  Thus  also  did  the  Jews,  who  ate  together  at  ^ 
their  sacrificial  repasts,  to  which  none  but  Jews  were  admitted,  there-  i 

I 
I 

I 


*§)   109.]  INSTITyTION  OF  BAPTISM.  511 


by  profess  that  they  all  viewed  each  other  as  brethren."^     Com- 
pare Worbs  "  On  Oriental  tokens  of  Covenants  and  of  friendship^ 
in  illustration  of  some  passages  of  Scripture,  1792."     The  writer 
of  this  article  proves  that  eating  a  morsel  of  bread  and  drinking  to- 
gether, are  considered  by  several  oriental  nations,  as  a  token  of  im- 
mutable fidelity  to  a  contract,  and  constancy   in  friendship.     The 
same  writer  also  makes  the  following  remark  :  "  among  the  reasons 
I  which  induced  our  Lord,  in  the  institution  of  the   Holy  Supper,  to- 
I  select  this  pleasing  ceremony,  which  had   previously  been  customa- 
!  ry,  one  was,  to  clothe  his  cardinal  precept  "  love  one  another,"  in  a 
form  visible  to  the  senses,  and  thus  to  give  universal  prevalence  to 
[that  noble  custom  of  the  East." 

j      "  The  solemn  consecration  of  an   individual  to  communion  with 
the  church,  i.  e.  his  first  admission  to  membership  by  baptism,  is  a 
I  very  significant  solemnity  indeed,  a  solemnity  which  aims  at  the  holy 
I  object  of  educating  a  soul  in  a  kingdom  erected  by  God,  and  imposes 
I  great  responsibility  on  the  person   thus  initiated  ;  or  if  the  subject 
!  be  an  infant,  on  those   who   promise   to  educate  it  in  the  christian 
f  faith.     The  solemnity  of  renewing  and  perpetuating  this  church 
communion  on   principles  of  equality  (an  ordinance  which  is  fre- 
;  quently  to  be  repeated,  and   which,  agreeably  to  the  example  of 
Christ,  is  also  performed  in  remembrance  of  him)  has  in  it  some- 
thing of  an  exalted  nature,  which  expands  and  elevates  the  narrow, 
selfish,  and  intolerant  views  of  men,  to  the  idea  of  a  universal  mo- 
ral community,  embracing  the  whole  world,  and  is  happily  calcu- 
lated to  awaken  a  congregation  to  those  feelings  of  brotherly  love 
designated  by  it." 


SECTIONCIX. 

Institution  of  baptism. 

Christ  commanded(l)  that  all  those  who  would  be  his  disciples, 

(2)  should,  at  the  time  of  their  reception  into  the  church,  be,  once, 

(3)  baptized,  i.  e.  bathed(4)  with   water,  in  honour  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost. 

Illustrations. 
I.  This  command  is  given  in  Matt.  28:  18  etc.    Mark  16:  16. 


1  See  Mosheim's  Exposition  of  the  1st  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  p.  607. 


512  OP  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

Eph.  5:  26,  lovrgov  tov  vdatog  iv  qyhiuti  "  the  water  bath,  which 
is  connected  with  a  command." 

II.  B^aptism  is  to  be  administered  once  to  every  Christian^ 
throughout  all  ages  of  the  church. — Baptism  is  intended  for  the 
church  in  general,  without  distinction  of  nation  or  condition,  or  sex, 
or  time,  Eph.  5:  25 — 27,  xadagioag  z^v  izxXfjaiuv  zai  kovigco  zov 
vdazog  that  he  might  purify  the  church  by  the  washing  of  water. 
Matt.  28:  19,  navva  roc  i&ptj  all  nations.  Gal.  3:  27  etc.  'Jovdaloq 
"EXkrjv — dovkog^  iXev&egog — agatv  xal  d^rjXv  (i^a7izta-&r]Gav  eig  XgiG' 
tov)  Jew,  Greek — slave,  free — male  and  female  (were  baptized  in- 
to Christ.)  Acts  16:  15,  ylvdla  i^anzla&r]  xal  6  oixog  avztjg  Lydia 
was  baptized  and  her  (family)  household.  8:  12,  l^anzi^ovxo  uv- 
Sgeg  ze  xal  yvpal-Aig  both  men  and  women  were  baptized.  As  long 
as  there  is  a  church  on  earth,  as  long  as  the  Holy  Supper  is  to  be 
solemnized,^  even  until  the  end  of  the  world  (1  Cor.  11:  26,)  this 
command  of  Christ,  that  his  disciples  are  by  all  means  to  be  bap- 
tized, must,  together  with  the  other  precepts  of  his  which  are  to  be 
taught  in  his  church,  be  attended  with  the  utmost  care. 

Hence,  whosoever  knowingly  and  wilfully  rejects  baptism,  treats 
with  indifference  a  precept  of  the  most  exalted  Messenger  of  God 
(John  3:  31,)  yea,  of  the  Lord  himself  (Matt.  28:  18;)  and  is 
guilty  of  a  much  greater  crime^  than  those  were,  who  rejected^  the 
baptism  of  John,  which  had  also  been  commanded  by  God.  John 
1:  33.  Luke  3:  2.  And  how  can  the  despisers  of  baptism  expect 
to  meet  the  approbation  of  the  Lord,  when  he  himself,  although  he 
did  not  need  baptism,  so  highly  honoured  the  invitation  of  John  as 
to  be  baptized  by  him,  amid  the  most  evident  tokens  of  the  divine 
favour?  Matt.  3:  14 — 17.  But  those,  on  the  contrary,  who  are 
unacquainted  with  the  precept  of  Christ  relative  to  baptism,  and 
who  are  not  themselves  the  cause  of  their  ignorance  of  it,  cannot 
be  deemed  despisers  of  baptism  ;  nor  are  they  guilty  of  unbelief  or 
disobedience,  in  not  attending  to  this  ordinance  of  God.     Compare 

*^i-       .    .      .. 

III.  Baptism  is  administered  only  once  to  each  Christian. — 
Hence,  the  sacred  writers,  when  speaking  of  those  who  had  already 
been  received  into  the  church,  say,  "  they  have  been  baptized," 
and  not  "they  partake  of  baptism."  Thus  Rom.  6:  3,  etc.  t^an- 
Tia'&t]^i6v  we  were  baptized.  Col.  2:  11.  Heb.  10.  23,  XtXov^tvoi 
being  washed.  But  the  Holy  Supper  they  represent  as  a  rite 
which  is  to  be  often  repeated,  and  is  to  be  habitually  performed  ; 
and  never  do  they  speak  of  it  as  an   ordinance  which   has  already 

1  Matth.  28:  20,  and  28: 18—20,  Comp.   Eckerman's  Comp.  Theol.  Christ,  p. 
215.  ed.  1.  2  John  3:  32— 3G.  Heb.  2:  2, 3.  12:  25. 

3  Matth.  21:  25—32.  Luke  7:  30,  they  rejected  the  counsel  of  God  etc. 


§  109.]  BAPTISM.  513 

I  been  observed  by  any  one,  and  which  is  not  to  be  repeated.  1  Cor. 
11:  25  etc.  Acts  2:  42.    1  Cor.  10:  16,  6  evXoyovfAev — op  xXcHfiev, 
,  which  we  bless — which  we  break.  17:  21.     In  reference  to  Acts  19: 
!  3 — 5,  where  it  is  stated  that  the  disciples  of  John,  who  had  re- 
I  ceived  John's  baptism,  were  again  baptized  in  "  the  name  of  the  Lord 
I  Jesus,"  Weismann  remarks,^  that  between  the  baptism  of  John  and 
I  that  instituted  by  Jesus,  there  existed  such  a  difference  as  would 
f  justify  them  in  being  baptized  again.     And  Ernesli'^  says,  the  differ- 
1  ence  consisted  in   this,  that  John  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  future 
i  Messiah,  to  igxoftevov;  whereas  the  baptism  commanded  by  Christ, 
I  was  connected  with  the  profession,  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  who  died 
for  us,  and  after  his  resurrection  ascended  to  heaven,  is  the  Messiah. 
IV.    The  primitive  mode  was  probably  by  immersion. — The  dis- 
^  ciples  of  our  Lord  could  understand  his  command  in  no  other  man- 
ner, than  as  enjoining  immersion  ;  for  the  baptism  of  John,  to  which 
Jesus  himself  submitted,^  and  also  the  earlier  baptism  (John  4:  ].) 
of  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  were  performed  by  dipping  the  subject  into 
cold  water ;  as  is  evident  from  the  following  passages.     Matt.  3: 
6,  t^amt^ovio  h  xo)  'Jogdavri  were   baptized    in   Jordan,   v.   16. 
'Jrjaovg  avt^rj  and  rov  vdaiog  Jesus   ascended    out   of  the   water. 
John  3:  23,  otv  vduTcc  noXXd  riv  Iy.h  because  there  was  much  water 
there.     [That  the  language  of  our  author  in  this  and  the  following 
paragraphs  is  entirely  too  strong,  will  we  think  appear  from  the  ap- 
pendix annexed  to  this  paragraph.  S.] 

And  that  they  actually  did  understand  it  so,  is  proved,  partly  by 
those  passages  of  the  New  Testament,  which  evidently  allude  to 
immersion.  Acts  8:  36  etc.  on  avi^n^av  /x  xoij  vdarog  when  they 
had  come  up  out  of  the  water,  v.  39.  16j  12—15,  nagu  nora^wv  at 
the  river.  Rom.  6:  4,  Gweiacfn^iev  uvim  [tot  Xqioim)  did  loy  §an- 
tiafxaiog,  'iva  wontQ  riyt(j{yn  Xgiaxog  6x  vixQMv  are  buried  with  him 
(Christ)  by  baptism,  so  that  as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead  etc. 
Comp.  Col.  2:  12,  and  1  Pet.  3:  21,  where  baptism  is  termed,  the 
antitype  {dt^iUvnov)  of  the  flood.— And  partly,  from  the  fact,  that 
immersion  was  so  customary  in  the  ancient  church,^  that  even  in 
the  third  century,  the  baptism  of  the  sick,  who  were  merely  sprink- 
led with  water,  was  entirely  neglected  by  some,  and  by  others  was 
thought  inferior  to  the  baptism  of  those  who  were  in  health,  and 
who°receive  baptism  not  merely  by  aspersion,  but  who  actually 


1  Institut.  Thoel.  exegetico-dogm.  p.  684. 

2  Vindiciae  arbitrii  divini  in  religione  constituenda,  §  50—53. 

3  John  1:25  etc.  28,31,33. 

4  Vide  Suicer.  Thesaurus  Ecclesiasticus  art.  avadv'oj.     Bingham,  Origlnes  ec 
clesiasticae,  L.  XI.  chap.  2.  Opp.  Lond.  1726.  English  edit.  Vol.  1.  p.  521  etc. 

65 


514  '        OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

bathed^  themselves  in  water.  This  is  evident  from  Cyprian,  (Epist. 
69.  ed.  Bremae,  p.  185  etc.)  and  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  L.  VI. 
cap.  43),  where  we  find  the  following  extract  from  the  letter  of  the 
Roman  Bishop  Cornelius  :  "  Novatus  received  baptism  on  a  sick- 
bed, hy  aspersion,  {negixv-&fig,)  if  it  can  be  said  that  such  a  person 
received  baptism." — ''  No  person  who  had,  during  sickness,  been 
baptized  by  aspersion,  was  admitted  into  the  clerical  office."  More- 
over, the  old  custom  of  immersion  was  also  retained  a  long  time  in 
the  Western  church,  at  least  in  the  case  of  those  who  were  not  in- 
disposed. And,  even  after  aspersion  had  been  fully  introduced  in  a 
part  of  the  Western  churches,  there  yet  remained  several,  who,  for 
some  time  adhered  to  the  ancient  custom.^  Under  these  circum- 
stances, it  is  certainly  to  be  lamented,  that  Luther  was  not  able  to 
accomplish  his  wish^  with  regard  to  the  introduction  of  immersion 
in  baptism,"*  as  he  had  done  in  the  restoration  of  wine  in  the  Eucha- 
rist. But  it  is  evident  that  there  was  a  very  important  difference  be- 
tween the  two  cases.  After  the  restoration  of  the  wine,  the  laity 
could  partake  of  both  bread  and  wine  in  the  celebration  of  the  Sup- 
per of  our  Lord.  But,  on  the  contrary,  if  immersion  had  at  that 
time  been  restored,  whatever  course  those  who  had  been  baptized 
by  aspersion  might  pursue,  whether  they  were  contented  with  their 
baptism  by  aspersion,  or  incurred  the  danger  of  disobeying  Christ's 
precept,  by  being  baptized  twice ;  they  would  have  been  harassed 
by  doubts  and  fears,  which  it  would  have  been  difficult,  and  per- 
haps, in  most  cases,  impossible  to  remove.  Happily,  however,  the 
change  of  the  ancient  custom  of  immersion,  although  it  ought  not 
to  have  been  made,  destroys  nothing  that  is  essential  to  this  cere- 
mony as  it  was  instituted  by  our  Saviour.^  For  the  essence  of 
the  rite,  is  not  the  washing  of  the  body,^  but  the  use  of  conse- 

1  Baptism  is  termed  kovTQor^  a.  washing  or  bathing.  Epii.  5:26.  Tit.  3:  5. 
Comp.  Xslovfi-ivoi  Heb.  10:  22.  1  Pet.  3:  21,  oaQnog  airod^eais  ^vnov  putting  away 
the  filth  of  the  flesh.  [For  a  learned  and  radical  discussion  of  every  thing  phil- 
ological, exegetical  and  historical,  which  is  of  moment  in  this  controversj',  we 
would  refer  the  reader  to  Prof.  Stuart's  Dissertation  on  the  Mode  of  Baptism, 
in  the  Biblical  Repository,  of  Dr.  Robinson,  vol.  III.  p.  288 — 390. 

2  Vide  Forbesii  Instr.  Historico-Theol.  de  doctrina  Christiana,  L.  X.  c.  s.  § 
53  etc.  58  etc.  Amsterdam,  1702.  Danovii  Inslitut.  Theol.  Dogm.  §  277,  p.  525. 
Mailer's  Neue  Darstellung  der  christlichen  Glaubenslehre,  p.  271. 

3  [In  this  wish  the  great  body  of  Lutheran  divines  has  never  coincided  ;  nor 
can  the  translator,  entertaining  the  views  exhibited  in  the  Appendix,  see  the  de- 
sirableness of  such  a  change;  especially  for  moral  reasons  resuliing  from  the 
difference  in  the  habits  of  the  Orientals  and  ourselves  in  regard  to  bathing.] 

4  Lutheri  Opp.  Lips.  1792,  Vol.  XVII.  p.  272,  5.3G.  Buddei  Institut.  Theol. 
Dogm.  p.  1444—1446. 

5  This  remark  may  also  serve  as  a  reply  to  the  author  of  a  publication  "  On 
Baptism,"  p.  170  etc.,  where  aspersion  is  objected  to.  Vide  Tub.  Gel.  Anzeig. 
1803,  Ft.  7,  p.  55  etc. 

6  1  Pet.  3:  21,  ov  aa^xos  dTTo&saig  ^vTtov  not  the  putting  off  the  filth  of  the 
flesh. 


4>  109.]  BAPTISM.  515 

crated  water^  in  honor  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost. 
And  this  is  retained  in  baptism  by  aspersion.  Nor  is  it  of  as  orreat 
importance  as  Luthei-^  and  some  late  theologians  have  thought,  that 
aspersion  destroys  the  force  of  some  passages  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  which  immersion  is  figuratively  applied  to  certain  spirit- 
ual changes  and  blessings.  For,  the  signification  of  these  figures, 
namely,  the  Christian's  participation  in  the  death  and  resuscitation 
of  Jesus,  together  with  the  blessings  and  duties  connected  with  it, 
is  not  destroyed  ;  because  the  whole  is  performed  in  honour  of  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  (*§>  43.  111.  4.)  And  a  specific,  cir- 
cumstantial, figurative  representation  of  those  truths  which  refer  to 
the  relation  which  those  who  are  baptized,  bear  to  God  and  Christ, 
has  no  necessary  connexion  with  the  rile  of  baptism  itself.  Christ 
did  not  intend  to  prescribe  immersion  as  a  ceremony  which  should 
specifically  represent  a  certain  participation  of  the  Christian  in  his 
burial  and  resurrection.  For,  the  apostles  do  not  always  retain  the 
figures  drawn  from  immersion  (Rom.  6:  4.  Col.  2:  12;)  but  also 
use  others.  At  one  time  they  compare  baptism  to  the  immersion 
of  those  who  were  destroyed  by  the  flood  (1  Pet.  3:  21  ;)  at  an- 
other time,  to  a  washing  off.  Acts  22:  16,  '*  be  baptized  and  wash 
away  your  sins."  Sometimes  it  is  compared  to  a  Levitical  wash- 
ing; as  Heb.  10:  9,2,  ^.e^ovfu'vot  vdati  xa&agco  being  washed  with 
pure  water,  compare  with  9:  10,  didq:ogoi  ^auTiGfxo?^  various  wash- 
ings ;  and  sometimes  to  any  other  washing,  as  Eph.  5:  26  etc.  where 
baptism  is  compared  to  a  bath  or  washing  kovigov,  by  which  spots 
and  impurities  are  removed.  Whereas,  if  those  peculiar  circum- 
stances were  essential,  the  apostles  would  have  used  them  exclu- 
sively and  uniformly.  The  reason  why  Christ  prescribed  immer- 
sion, in  baptism,  from  which  the  several  figures  found  in  the  New 
Testament  are  taken,  seems  to  have  been,  that  some  of  his  first  fol- 
lowers were  already  accustomed  to  religious  washings  of  this  kind, 
especially  the  Jews,  who  had  been  used  to  Levitical  washings  (Heb. 
9:  10,)  and  to  the  baptism  of  Jesus  and  of  John  (John  3:  22  etc. 
4:  1,)  and  perhaps  also  to  proselyte  baptism.^  Thus  we  see  that  a 
custom,  previously  existing,  gave  a  peculiar  form  to  baptism,  just  as 
the  paschal  supper  of  the  Jews  gave  rise  to  the  Holy  Supper  of  our 

i  Acts  10:  47.  (Comp.  ]1:  16.)  John  3:  5.  1  John  5:  6,  8.  In  these  passages, 
water  is  mentioned  instead  of  baptism,  or  at  least,  as  the  principal  thing  in  that 
ordinance. 

2  Lutheri  opp.  sup.  cit.  p.  536.  Heilmann  Comp.  Theol.  Dogm.  p.  356.  Mi- 
chaelis  Dogm.  p.  622,  632.  Teller  Excurs.  II.  ad  Burnetum  de  fide  et  officua 
Christianorum,  p.  256. 

3  Vide  Seileri  Theol.  doo-matico-polemica,  p.  582— 584, 2d  ed.  In  favour  of 
proselyte  baptism,  see  Michaelis' Dogm.  §180.  Againstit,  Ernesti  Vindiciae 
arbilrii  divini,  §  49.  Heilmann's  Comp.  Dogmat.  p.  314.  Paiilus  Commentary 
on  the  New  Test.  p.  194  etc.  Reinhard's  Dogmatik,  p.  563.  On  Uaptisra,  p  11, 
—15,  where  the  historical  objections  against  its  truth  are  stated. 


516  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

Lord.  Mark  14:  12—26.  Luke  22:  14—20.  We  may,  therefore, 
without  any  hesitation  admit,  that  our  Lord  would  have  preferred 
aspersion  or  affusion  to  immersion,  if  a  custom  of  affusion  or  asper- 
sion had  previously  prevailed. 


Appendix  on  the  Mode  of  Baptism.^ 

The  mode  of  applying  water  in  Baptism. 

The  controversy  on  this  subject  has  always  been  regarded  by  the 
most  enlightened  divines,  including  Luther,  Melancthon,  and  Chem- 
nitz, as  one  of  comparatively  inferior  importance.  It  has  no  con- 
nexion with  the  question  of  infant  baj)tism  ;  because  churches  which 
baptize  by  immersion,  may  and  often  do  practise  infant  baptism 
(the  Greek  church)  ;  and  those,  who  baptize  by  affusion  or  asper- 
sion, may  confine  the  ordinance  to  adults.  The  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, therefore,  whilst  it  distinctly  enjoins  the  baptism  of  infants, 
specifies  nothing  as  to  the  mode  of  applying  the  water.  The  ques- 
tion in  dispute  is  not  whether  baptism  by  immersion  is  valid  ;  this 
is  admitted,  though  that  mode  is  thought  less  suitable  to  a  refined 
sense  of  moral  feeling  than  the  other.  But  the  question  is,  wheth- 
er immersion  is  enjoined  in  scripture,  and  consequently  is  one  essen- 
tial part  of  baptism,  so  that  without  it  no  baptism  is  valid,  though  it 
contain  every  other  requisite.  On  this  subject  the  Lutheran  church 
has  always  agreed  with  the  great  majority  of  Christian  denomina- 
tions, in  maintaining  the  negative,  and  in  regarding  the  quantity  of 
water  employed  in  baptism,  as  well  as  the  mode  of  exhibiting  it, 
not  essential  to  the  validity  of  the  ordinance.  The  argument  may 
be  briefly  stated  thus  : 

No  circumstances  can  be  necessary  to  the  validity  of  a  divine 
ordinance,  excepting  those  which  God  has  commanded  in  his  word : 

But  God  has  not  commanded  immersion  in  his  word ; 

Therefore,  it  is  not  necessary  to  the  validity  of  the  ordinance  of 
baptism. 

The  first  of  these  propositions  is  admitted  by  all  Protestant  de- 
nominations :  and  cannot  be  denied  by  any  one,  who  does  not  hold 
the  following  absurd  positions,  a)  that  the  word  of  God  is  an  insuf- 
ficient guide  for  man,  b)  That  uninspired  men  may  add  to  this  rev- 
elation, and  c)  That  whatever  any  uninspired  men  may  choose  to 
add,  all  other  men  must  subsequently  observe  on  pain  of  eternal  per- 
dition. The  second  proposition,  therefore,  alone  needs  investigation  : 
namely,  "  that  God  has  not  commanded  immersion  in  his  word." 

1  See    the   Translator's   work  entitled   Elements  of  Popular  Theology,  with 
special  reference  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  p.  216—223.  2d  edition. 


*§>  109.]  BAPTISM.  517 


1.  The  friends  of  immersion  do  not  contend,  that  there  Is  any- 
specific  command  ;  but  allege,  that  the  word  "  baptize"  itself,  does 

i  in  the  New  Testament  Greek,  necessarily  imply  immersion.  The 
fallacy  of  this  opinion  is  evident  from  all  the  passages,  in  which  the 

I  word  is  used  in  such  a  way  as  to  throw  light  on  its  precise  meaning. 

a)  Heb.  9:  10.  Which  (the  Jewish  service)  stood  (consisted)  in 
meats  and  drinks  and  divers  baptisms  (^amiafiotg.)  A  reference 
to  the  Old  Testament,^  where  these  baptisms,  or  as  our  English 
version  renders  it,  washings,  are  described,  proves  that  they  were 
performed  by  sprinkling  and  pouring ;  but  it  is  not  mentioned  in  a 
single  case,  that  the  object  must  be  put  under  the  water. 

b)  Mark  7:  4.  "  And  when  they  come  from  the  market,  except 
they  w^ash  (baptize  themselves)  they  eat  not:"  Now  it  certainly 
was  the  custom  of  the  Jews  to  wash  their  hands  before  eating,  but 

[what  author  ever  contended  that  they  entirely  immersed  themselves 
!  in  water  ?  Yet  this  application  of  water  to  a  very  small  part  of  the 
body  is  called  baptism,  c)  Again  ;  "  And  many  other  things  there 
I  be,  which  they  have  received  to  hold,  as  the  baptism  of  cups  and 
,pots,  brazen  vessels,  and  of  tables  (beds,  couches,  xUi^tj.")  The 
icups  and  pots  might  indeed  be  immersed  in  water,  yet  of  this  we 
are  not  certain.  But  will  it  be  contended,  that  the  beds  or  couches 
!  were  carried  to  some  often  distant  river  to  be  immersed  ?  or  that  ev- 
ery pharisee  had  a  cistern  provided  in  his  yard  for  this  purpose  ? 
It  is  therefore  evident  that  many  of  the  purifications,  termed  bap- 
tisms in  the  New  Testament,  were  certainly  performed  by  sprink- 
ling, and  (as  in  the  case  of  the  tables)  by  pouring ;  whilst  it  is  not 
certain  that  they  were  performed  by  immersion  in  a  single  case. 
Hence  there  is  much  more  scripture  authority  for  sprinkling  and 
pourinff,  than  for  immersion. 

2.  Nor  do  the  circumstances,  related  in  the  New  Testament  as 
attendant  on  baptism,  prove  the  practice  of  immersion. 

a)  The  baptism  of  the  three  thousand  convert?,^  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  was  performed  at  Jerusalem,  where  there  was  no  river 
or  creek  ;  at  a  time,  when  it  was  summer  in  Judea  (close  of  March,) 
and  rains  were  scarce,  and  the  brook  Kedron  dry,  and  nothing  re- 
mained near  Jerusalem  but  the  single  pool  of  Siloam.  How  could 
the  apostles,  under  these  circumstances,  have  found  places  to  bap- 
tize such  a  multitude  in  one  day  by  immersion  ?  Suppose,  that 
the  apostles  went  into  the  pool  alternately,  relieving  each  other, 
and  one  was  constantly  engaged  in  the  act  of  baptizing,  it  is  utterly 

1  Nu^bTlOriS.  AndTcTean  person  shall  take  a  hyssop,  and  dip  it  in  water, 
and  spri7ikle  it  upon  the  tent,  and  upon  all  the  vessels,  and  upon  the  persor^  that 
were  there,  and  upon  him  that  touched  a  bone,  or  one  slain,  or  one  dead,  or  a 
grave,  etc.     So  also  verse  4, 13, 19,  20,  21. 

2  Acts  2. 


518  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IT. 


impossible  that  the  three  thousand  could  have  been  baptized  in  a 
day.  But  a  large  part  of  the  day  had  elapsed  before  the  baptisms 
began :  the  effusion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  their  preaching  to  persons 
from  different  countries,  in  their  own  languages,  the  accusations  a- 
gainst  the  apostles,  Peter's  defence  from  the  scriptures,  the  convic- 
tions of  multitudes  and  their  inquiries  what  they  must  do  to  be  saved , — 
all  these  things  had  occurred  beforehand,  so  that,  at  earliest,  the 
work  of  baptizing  did  not  begin  before  noon.  Admitting  that  the 
six  remaining  hours  of  the  day  were  all  devoted  to  this  business, 
and  that  by  frequent  changes  one  of  the  twelve  was  incessantly  in 
the  act  of  baptizing,  he  would  have  to  baptize  five  hundred  persons 
in  one  hour,  or  eighty  every  minute  I  Or  suppose,  what  is  indeed  very 
improbable,  and  contrary  to  the  ttnour  of  the  narrative  of  Luke,  that 
when  the  work  of  baptizing  had  been  resolved  on,  the  apostles  divided 
the  whole  multitude  into  twelve  equal  parts,  and  each  one,  at  the  head 
of  his  division,  marching  straightway  in  quest  of  some  bath  house  or 
cistern,  all  spent  the  remainder  of  the  day  laboriously  engaged  in  this 
work  ;  would  it  not  still  be  impossible  that  they  should  have  bap- 
tized that  number  ?  An  hour  at  least  would  be  consumed  in  di- 
viding the  multitude  and  inquiring  for  the  baths,  in  repairing  to  them 
and  placing  them  in  order.  Can  it  be  beheved,  that  each  apostle 
could  have  baptized  two  hundred  and  fifty  in  five  hours,  averaging 
very  nearly  one  for  every  minute  of  the  whole  time,  even  if  they 
were  all  standing  naked,  ready  to  leap  in  as  soon  as  the  apostle 
could  lay  his  hands  on  them  ?  But  surely  it  will  not  be  contended 
that  all  these  persons  of  different  sexes  bathed  naked  in  each  other's 
presence.  Yet  where  could  the  three  thousand  suddenly  have 
found  bathing  dresses  ?  And  to  bathe  with  their  ordinary  clothes 
on  would  have  been  certain  disease  or  death  to  multitudes  of  them. 
Is  it  not  infinitely  more  reasonable  to  believe,  that  the  multitudes 
remained  together,  and,  after  having  been  baptized  by  sprinkling 
according  to  the  Jewish  custom  (Numb.  19:  8.)  which  could  have 
been  done  in  less  than  an  hour,  continued  to  listen  to  the  words  of 
eternal  life  ? 

b)  The  language  of  Peter,  when  he  baptized  the  Gentiles  at  the 
house  of  Cornelius,  does  not  favour  immersion.  When  they  believ- 
ed and  received  the  Holy  Ghost,  Peter  said,  "Can  any  man  forbid 
water  J  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  ?"  that  is,  forbid  water  to 
be  brought.  Had  he  intended  to  baptize  them  by  immersion  it 
would  have  been  much  more  natural  for  him  to  say,  "  Can  any  man 
forbid  us  to  go  out  to  the  water,  and  baptize  these." 

c)  The  circumstance  of  the  Jailor's  baptism,  Acts  16:  19 — 39. 
imply  that  he  was  not  baptized  by  immersion.  He  was  baptized 
in  the  night,  when  it  would  have  been  very  inconvenient  to  go  to  a 
suitable  place  for  immersion.     The  rite  was  evidently  performed  in 


<J  109.]  BAPTISM.  519 


the  principal  room  of  the  prison;  for  nothing  is  said  of  their  leaving 
the  house  ;  we  are  only  told  that  they  had  been  thrust  into  the  dun- 
geon or  inner  prison,  and  that  they  were  brought  out  of  that  apart- 
ment to  where  the  family  of  the  Jailor  were,-whom  they  taught. 

And  when  he  professed  his  faith,  we  are  told  that  he  was  baptized 
immediately,  not,  he  immediately  started,  off  with  his  family  and 
with  Paul  and  Silas,  in  the  night,  to  a  suitable  place  to  be  immer- 
sed. 

d)  Matt.  3:  16.  When  Jesus  was  baptized  of  John  in  the  Jordan, 
"  he  went  up  straightway  out  of  the  ^ water  :"  and  Acts  8:  38, 
"  They  (the  Ethiopian  eunuch  and  Philip)  went  down  both  into 
the  water,  and  he  baptized  him."  In  these  passages  the  prepo- 
sitions elg  and  ajio,  may  with  equal  propriety  be  rendered  to  and 
from.  Thus  the  former  is  translated  in  John's  gospel,^  "John  came 
first  to  (fig)  the  sepulchre"  of  our  Lord,  '^  but  he  went  not  inf^ 
and  again  "  He  sent  forth  his  servants  to  call  them  that  were  bid- 
den to  {ilg)  the  wedding  (feast")^  and  many  other  passages  '?  and 
the  latter  is  thus  rendered  in  the  passages,  "  And  forthwith  the  an- 
Igel  departed  from  (ano)  him,"'*  and  "  The  angel  came  and  rolled 
I  the  stone /rom  (ajio)  the  door,"^  and  others.^     These  prepositions 

do,  therefore,  not  with  certainty  prove  any  thing  more,  than  that 
these  persons  went  to  the  water  to  be  baptized,  and  afterwards 
jcame /row  it.  But  even  if  it  were  certain,  that  they  went  into  the 
(Water,  this  would  by  no  means  determine  the  manner  in  which  they 
Kvere  baptized.  They  might  have  gone  into  the  depth  of  their 
lancles  or  knees,  and  baptized  according  to  the  Jewish  baptism,  des- 
'cribed  in  Numbers,"''  by  pouring  the  water  on  with  a  vessel,  or  with 
the  hand,  or  by  sprinkling  it  over  the  subject. 

e)  Nor  does  the  fact,  that  "  John  baptized  in  iEnon,  because 
[there  was  much  water  [nolla  vdma,  many  springs)  there,"  de- 
termine the  mode  of  baptism.     Because  whatever  be  the  object, 

acred  or  profane,  for  which  large  multitudes  assemble,  to  spend 
one  or  more  day  together,  it  is  a  notorious  fact,  that  the  vicinity  of 
a  spring  or  creek  or  river  is  always  preferred,  for  water  is  indispen- 
sably necessary  to  their  subsistence.  Are  not  such  places  always 
preferred  for  fourth  of  July  orations,  military  parades  and  camp 
meetings;  yet  who  would  infer  that  the  methodists  baptize  by  im- 
mersion, because  they  hold  their  camp  meetings  in  the  vicinity  of 
water?  And  as  thousands  followed  John,  what  is  more  natural,  than 

1  John  20:  4,  5.  2  John  2:  3. 

3  John  4:  5.    Then  cometh  he  to  (««)  the  city.  Acts  13:  48.  21:  4.  Rom.  2:  4. 

4  Acts  12:  10.  5  Matt.  28:  2. 
6  Matt.  4:  25.  24:  31.  28:  8.  ?  Chap.  19. 


620  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

that  he  should  select  a  place  where  there  was  abundance  of  water 
for  their  subsistence.  Indeed,  at  no  other  place  could  such  crowds 
remain  with  him  more  than  half  a  day,  or  even  that  long,  in  the 
warm  season.  Moreover,  we  are  told  that  there  were  "  many  wa- 
ters" at  -^non.  Now  it  is  geographically  certain,  that  there  are 
neither  many  rivers  nor  many  creeks  at  any  of  the  supposed  sites  of 
.^non,  for  its  location  is  not  fully  ascertained.  At  most,  then,  there 
were  several  springs  there  ;  but  are  springs  the  most  suitable  places 
for  immersion  ?  Certainly  not. 

f)  The  texts  Rom.  6:  4,  and  Col.  2:  12,  "Therefore  we  are 
buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  his  death,"  appear  to  refer  not  to 
the  mode  of  baptism,  but  to  the  spiritual  obligations  which  that  ordi- 
nance imposes  ;  it  requires  us  to  be  dead  to  the  world,  buried  to  all 
earthly  and  sinful  pursuits,  growing  together  with  him  spiritually, 
"  planted"  or  grafted  on  him.  What  reason  is  there  to  suppose 
that  one  of  these  figures  refers  to  the  mode  of  baptism  rather  than 
the  other  in  the  same  sentence  ?  And  what  mode  of  baptism,  would 
be  indicated  by  being  "  planted  together  with  Christ  by  baptism  ?" 
Or  what  mode  by  putting  on  Christ  like  a  garment.^ 

g)  1  Cor.  1 5:  29.  "  Else  what  shall  they  do  who  are  baptized 
for  [vntQ,)  or  over  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not  at  all  ?"  The  sig- 
nification of  this  passage  is  somewhat  obscure.  Tertullian,  Theo- 
philact  and  Epiphanius  inform  us,  that  it  was  the  custom  of  the 
Marcionites  and  Corinthians,  if  a  catechumen  died  before  his  bap- 
tism, to  baptize  some  other  in  his  stead,  as  the  apostles  here  seems 
to  intimate.  And  as  the  early  Christians  regarded  with  much 
veneration  the  graves  of  martyrs,  and  occasionally  held  assemblies 
on  the  spot,  it  is  supposed  that  in  these  vicarious  baptisms,  the  rite 
was  performed  over  his  grave.  This  would  be  the  obvious  meaning 
of  the  apostle,  if  his  language  {vni^)  in  this  passage  signifies  over  as 
it  certainly  often  does  in  Greek  writers.  But  could  the  baptisms 
over  the  graves  of  martyrs  be  performed  by  immersion  ?  Where 
their  graves  dug  at  the  bottom  of  rivers  ? 

h)  The  moral  unsuitableness  of  immersing  both  sexes  even  with 
bathing  dresses  before  a  promiscuous  community,  especially  in 
countries  where  bathing  is  seldom  practised,  renders  it  highly  im- 
probable, that  it  would  form  a  part  of  the  pure  system  of  gospel  re- 
ligion. Christianity  was  designed  for  universal  dissemination,  and, 
therefore, 

i)  Finally,  the  dans^er  to  the  life  and  health  of  those,  who  should 
be  thus  baptized,  in  the  winter  season,  and  especially  in  the  colder 
climates  of  the  earth,  renders  it  a  very  unsuitable  part  of  a  universal 
religion.     The  ministers  of  Christ  are  no  where  directed  to  defer 

1  Gal.  3:  27. 


§  no.]  BAPTISM.  521 


the  administration  of  this  ordinance  till  the  summer  arrives,  nor  are 
they  authorized  to  make  an  exception  in  the  case  of  the  most  con- 
firmed invalids,  v^rhose  very  life  would  be  in  jeopardy.  ^ 
From  all  these  considerations,  we  think,  our  second  position  is 
clearly  established,  that  God  has  not  commanded  immersion  in  his 
word  :  yea  it  is  clear  that  the  scriptures  contain  more  evidence  for 
sprinkling  and  pouring,  than  for  immersion  ;  hence  our  conclusion 
follows  incontrovertibly,  that  it  is  not  a  necessary  part  of  the  ordi- 
nance, and  that  sprinkling  and  pouring  are  preferable  to  it. 


SECTION    ex. 


The  'promises  which  are  connected  tvith  Baptism, 

When  Christ  commands  his  disciples  to  administer  the  ordinance 
of  baptism  in  honour  of  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit,  he  thereby 
declares  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  to  be  the  God  of  those  who 
are  baptized  (<§>  43,  45.)  This  declaration  amounts  to  (1)  a  solemn 
promise  of  the  divine  protection  and  favour ;  and  as  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit  are  to  be  considered  the  God  of  the  baptized,  it  in- 
cludes a  promise  of  those  specific  blessings  which,  according  to  the 
doctrines  of  Christ,  are  to  be  expected  from  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit.  In  short,  by  virtue  of  the  union  with  Christ, (2)  into  which 
we  enter  by  baptism,  we  are  assured  not  only  of  an  interest  in  the 
death  of  Christ,  and  of  the  remission  of  sins(3)  which  result  from 
it,  but  also  of  our  union  with  God  the  Father  as  our  Father,(4) 
and  our  consequent  title  to  eternal  life  ;(5)  as  well  as  of  our  union 
with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  participation  of  his  gracious  influences. 
(6)  In  short,  all  the  blessings,  which  have  a  reference  to  salvation, 
and  for  wliich  we  are  indebted  to  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  are 
promised  to  the  subjects  of 'baptism  ;  and,  in  case  they  do  not  deny 
themselves  the  enjoyment  of  them,  are  actually  bestowed  upon 
them  (-^  111.)  (7) 

Illustrations. 

I.     Baptism  assures  us  of  the  divine  protection  and  favour,--- 
Those  who  are  dedicated  to  God  in  Baptism,  and  have  thus  placed 
66 


522  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

themselves  under  an  acknowledged  obligation  of  obedience  to  God 
as  their  God,  are  also  thereby  authorized  to  expect  the  protection 
and  the  blessings  of  God.  Heb.  11:  16,  "  God  calls  himself  the 
God  of  the  deceased  patriarchs,  because  they  dwell  in  his  presence 
serving  and  worshipping  him,  because  he  rewards  their  obedience, 
and  because  they  live  to  his  glory."  Hence,  in  1  Pet.  3:  21,  one 
effect  attributed  to  baptism,  is,  that  it  procures  for  its  subject  a  con- 
fident access  to  God.  4^  43.  III.  4.  Membership  in  the  christian 
church,  does  indeed  assure  us  of  this  privilege  in  other  ways ;  but 
baptism  is  peculiarly  well  adapted  to  produce  this  confidence  in 
God,  inasmuch  as  it  embodies  the  divine  promise  in  a  visible  cere- 
mony, and  applies  it  specifically  to  an  individual  person.* 

II.  Effects  of  baptism  continued. — Gal.  3:  27,  ooot  eig  X^tardv 
i^amiaxf^tjTej  Xgiazdv  ivedvaaad^e  for  as  many  of  you  as  have  been 
baptized  into  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ.  By  virtue  of  this  union 
with  Christ,  the  subjects  of  baptism  are  entitled,  not  only  to  an 
interest  in  the  death  of  Christ,  but  also  to  the  right  of  being  chil- 
dren of  God,^  and  the  hope  of  hereafter  possessing  the  riches  of  their 
Father.  In  Rom.  6:  4,  5,  the  apostle  says.  We  are  buried  with 
him,  by  baptism  into  (his)  death  :  for  if  we  have  been  planted  with 
him  [beconie  partakers  with  him]  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we 
shall  be  also  etc.  Gal.  4:  7.  Moreover,  as  those  who  are  baptized, 
are  children  of  God,  and  sustain  the  most  intim.ate  union  with  the 
Son  of  God,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given  to  them.  Gal.  4:  6,  and  be- 
cause ye  are  sons,  God  has  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your 
hearts.  Gal.  3:  13,  that  ye  might  receive  the  promise  of  the  Spirit 
(the  blessing  of  Abraham.)  Those  who  have^  by  baptism,  been 
united  to  the  Son  of  God,  the  descendant  of  Abraham  (v.  16,)  will, 
in  consequence  of  this  union,  be  themselves  considered  and  treated 
as  sons  of  God,  as  descendants  of  Abraham,  and  heirs  of  God.  To 
them  also  is  the  Spirit  given,  who  inspires  them  with  filial  confi- 
dence in  God,  and  who  is  the  pledge  of  their  future  blessedness. — 
Rom.  8:  14—16.3 

III.  Subject  continued, — Col.  2:  12,  Buried  with  him  (Christ) 
in  baptism,  compared  with  v.  13,  having  forgiven  you  all  your  tres- 
passes. Acts  2:  28,  be  baptized  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Tit.  3:  4,  5,  7,  but  when  the 
kindness  and  love  of  God  our  Saviour  to  man  appeared,  he  saved 
us,  not  by  works  of  righteousness  which  we  have  done,  but  accord- 

1  See  114.  III.  13.  and  Heilmann's  Compend.  §  370,  and  Reichardi  Init.  doct. 
Christ.  P.  II.  C.  III.  §  65.  p.  117.  ed.  2. 

2  Gal.  3:  26.  4:  4.  John  1:  12,  he  gave  them  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God 
— adoptio. 

3  On  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  516.  Programma  de  consensu  Epp. 
Pauli  ad  Hebraeos  et  Galatas,  p.  12,  22. 


^  111.]  BAPTISM.  523 

ing  to  his  mercy  (or  for  his  mercy's  sake,)  by  the  washing  of  re- 
generation and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost — that  being  justified 
by  grace  etc.  1  Pet.  3:  21,  pamiofia — avvudyjoiojg  ayaOTJg  imgio- 
rrjfia  fig  S^tov.  In  this  passage,  the  pardon  of  sins  is  represented  as 
connected  with  baptism  into  the  death  of  Christ.  See  v.  18.^  Eph. 
5:  25,  Christ  gave  himself  for  the  church,  th?it  he  might  sanctify 
and  cleanse  it  by  the  washing  of  water.  Heb.  10:  22.  In  this  pas- 
sage, Christians  are  represented  as  having  by  baptism  attained  an 
interest  in  the  redemption  purchased  by  the  blood  of  Christ.^ 

IV.  By  baptism  we  become  sons  of  God  the  Father. — Gal.  3; 
26,  27,  for  ye  are  all  sons  of  God,  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ ;  for  as 
many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into  [in  the  name  of,  or  in  hon- 
our of  ]  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ.  Tit.  3:  5,  did  kovrgov  naXiy- 
yeviaiag, 

V.  By  baptism  we  are  made  "  heirs  according  to  the  hope  of 
eternal  life."  Gal.  4:  7.  Rom.  8:  17.  compare  John  3:  5,  where 
we^are  taught,  that  those  who  are  "  born  of  God"  {avo)&ev  v.  3.  ix 
Tov  ovgavov  v.  31.  ix  &60v  1:  12)  i.  e.  who  are  made  children  of 
God  by  water,  or  by  the  Spirit,  or  by  the  divine  agency,  have  ac- 
cess to  the  kingdom  of  God,  to  eternal  life.  3:  15 — 17.  In  Matt. 
21:  25,  the  phrase  /|  ovgavou  "  from  heaven"  is  placed  in  antithe- 
sis to  *|  dvd-gwTiGov  "  of  men,"  and  is  therefore  synonymous  with 
ix  &{Qv  "  of  God." 

VI.  Baptism  is  a  means  for  eflfecting  our  union  with  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  obtaining  his  gracious  influences.  Tit.  3:  5.  Acts  2:  38, 
be  baptized  every  one  of  you,  and  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

VII.  Tit.  3:  5,  iacaaev  etc.  1  Pet.  3:  21,  vvv  awff*  etc.  Mark 
16:  16,  aoi&ijaeiai  etc. 


SECTION   CXI. 


Obligations  attending  the  blessings  which  are  promised  in  baptism. 

As  we  may,  by  our  disobedience,  forfeit  the  salvation  which  was 
purchased  by  Christ  (<^  67,  72 ;)  even  those  who  were  baptized 
will  incur  this  loss,(l)  if  their  reception  of  this  ordinance  is  not  at- 

1  See  also  the  work  on  the  Death  of  Christ,  p.  530. 

2  Comment,  on  Heb.  in  loc.  note  k. 


524  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV, 

tended  by  a  change  of  heart,  and  reformation  of  life. (2)  If  we  de- 
sire to  regard  God,  in  whose  name  we  are  baptized,  as  our  God, 
whose  favour  we  may  expect  to  enjoy  ;  we  must  also  honour  him 
as  our  God.  And  as  we  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit,  we  must  honour  him  in  the  manner  prescribed  by 
those  doctrines,(3)  which  the  Father(4)  has  revealed  through  the 
Son  and  Holy  Spirit.  He  who  sincerely  believes  that  his  baptism 
has  secured  to  him  an  interest  in  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  and  the 
pardon  purchased  by  them,  will,  if  he  was  sincere  in  his  baptismal 
professions,  feel  himself  powerfully  urged  by  this  belief,  to  renounce 
the  ways  of  iniquity, (5)  and  submit  to  the  guidance  of  him  whom 
he  acknowledges  as  his  Lord  and  Redeemer.  (6) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Baptism  not  sufficient  for  salvation,  without  a  change  of 
heart  and  life.— In  Acts  8:  21 — 23,  Peter  addressing  Simon  the 
sorcerer,  who  had  received  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  says  v.  13, 
thou  has  neither  part  nor  lot  in  the  matter — repent  therefore.  And 
in  Matt.  3:  7 — 10,  John  the  Baptist  admonishes  in  the  most  earnest 
manner  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  who  came  to  be  baptized  by 
him,  telling  them  that  without  repentance  and  reformation,  they 
could  not  escape  the  wrath  to  come. 

II.  Subject  continued. — Acts  2:  38,  repent  and  be  baptized, 
every  one  of  you.  Tit.  3:  5,  the  washing  of  regeneration.  Acts  13: 
24.  19:  4.  John's  baptism  is  termed  "  baptism  of  repentance,"  in 
Mark  1:  4.  Matt.  3:  11,  John  says,  I  baptize  you  unto  repentance. 

In  the  work  on  Baptism  above  referred  to,  the  phrase  "  washing 
(or  bath)  of  regeneration,"  Xovrgov  naXtyyevsalccg,  as  also  the  words 
"  washing  of  water  by  the  word"  Xovzgoif  vdaxog  iv  gij/^azt  Eph.  5: 
26,  are  supposed  to  refer  to  the  Gospel,  as  the  true  means  of  moral 
purification,  in  opposition  to  the  Levitical  purifications.^  But  in  re- 
ply to  this,  it  may  be  remarked,  that  as  the  words  Xovzgov  and 
XovTQov  ijdatog  washing,  and  washing  of  water  would  naturally  be 
understood  by  every  reader  to  signify  baptism,  it  would  have  been 
necessary  for  the  apostle  to  add  some  explanatory  clause,  if  he  in- 
tended by  them  to  designate  the  doctrines  of  Jesus.' 

III.  TTie  subjects  of  baptism  must  adore  God,  as  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit. — According  to  the  formula  of  baptism,  the  Fath- 
er, Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  are  the  God  of  those  who  receive  that 
ordinance.     Hence,  those  who  do  not  receive  the  doctrines  of  Jesus 

1  Tubing,  gel.  Anzeig.  1803.  p.  52. 


^112.]  BA!»TISM.  525 


I  Christ  or  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles  or  of 
I  the   Holy  Spirit,  (»§>  9 — 11)   as  the  doctrines  of  the  Father,  with 
whom  the  Son  and  Spirit  are  one,  as  the   doctrines  of  their  God ; 
I  either  do  not  receive  baptism   with  a  sincere  heart,  or  reject  that 
ordinance  after  it  has  been  administered  to  them  ;  that  is,  either  they 
are  not  true  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  are  not  ^a&rjTfv&ftg  tio 
Xgiaita  made  disciples  in  the  name  of  Christ  (Matt.  28:  19.  comp. 
John  4:  1 ;)  or  they  lose  that  character  after  having  possessed  it. — 
I  For  this  reason  it  was,  that  Christ,  when  giving  his  apostles  the 
I  command  to  baptize  his  future  disciples,  places  in  immediate  con- 
nexion with  it,  the  injunction  that  they  should  teach  the  subjects  of 
baptism  to  keep  his  commandments.     Matt.  28:  20,  comp.  John 
17:  20.    It  was  the  promotion  of  his  honour  (declarative  glory)  of 
which  Jesus  aimed   in  the  institution  of  baptism  ;  and  this  too  was 
the  design  of  the  Father,  when  he  declared  at  the  baptism  of  Je- 
sus, that  he  was  his  well  beloved   Son,i  whom  we  ought  to  hear,^ 
and  who  would   baptize^  his  apostles  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  which 
Spirit  would,  after  his  death,  teach  mankind  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  the  apostles. 

IV.  God  is  to  be  worshipped,  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  the 
Father,  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  Son  and  Spirit.  John  12: 
49  etc.   16:  7—15.  Matt.  10:  20. 

V.  Baptismal  dedication  to  God  is  a  powerful  motive  to  a  holy 
life.  Rom.  6:  2—12.  1  Pet.  3:  21.  4:  2.     See  supra  <5»  92. 

VI.  1  Cor.  1:  13.  Eph.  5:  23—26.  §  43.  111.  4. 


SECTION    CXII. 

The  propriety  of  infant  baptism. 

That  it  is  proper  to  receive  infants  into  the  visible  church  by  bap- 
tism, appears  evident  from  the  following  considerations.     The  gra- 
cious provisions  of  God  for  the  salvation  of  man,  such  as  remission 
of  sins  or  liberation  from  punishment,  to  which  we  become  entitled 
I  by  baptism,  are   represented   in   Scripture,   as  extending  to  little 
'  children  (<§>  68,  58.)     Little  children  also  are,  although  not  imme- 

1  Matt.  3:  17.  John  5:  37.  comp.  with  v.  18.  and  1:  34. 

2  Matt.  3:  17.  comp.  17:  5.  The  same  words  are  used  at  the  baptism  and  at  the 
transfiguration  of  Jesus  :  merely  with  the  additional  phrase,  "  hear  ye  him." 

3  Matt  3:  16.  comp.  John  1:  32.  Acts  1:  4  etc. 


526  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

diately  after  their  birth,  yet  subsequently,  to  be  taught  to  observe 
the  commands  of  Christ,(l)  just  as  is  the  case  with  those  who  are 
baptized.  Matt.  28:  19,  20.  The  lawfulness  of  their  early  recep- 
tion (2)  among  the  followers  of  Christ  is  rendered  the  more  evident 
from  the  fact  that,  by  virtue  of  their  birth  and  of  the  duties  of 
christian  parents,  Christianity  is  already  allotted  to  them  by  God. — 
Nor  is  there  any  thing  in  the  nature  of  baptism(3)  itself,  which 
could  disqualify  children  for  being  proper  subjects  of  it.  Hence  the 
nature  of  christian  baptism  does  not  render  it  necessary  to  limit  the 
command  of  Christ  "  baptize  all  nations,"  (navza  zee  t'&vi],)  to  ad- 
ults. And,  as  the  command  of  Jesus,  in  its  natural  acceptation, 
embraces  the  whole  human  family,  without  reference  to  diversity  of 
age,  it  is  not  probable  that  children  (and  among  the  multitudes  who 
embraced  Christianity,  the  question  concerning  children  must  have 
arisen)  would  have  been  debarred  from  baptism  by  the  apostles;  for 
the  apostles,  as  well  as  the  other  Jewish  converts,  had  always  been 
accustomed(4)  to  see  little  children  received  into  the  number  of 
God's  people  by  circumcision, (5)  and  to  see  it  done  even  under 
the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  in  which  the  people  of  God,  con- 
fessedly, was  not  destined  to  such  an  unlimited  extension  as  in  the 
church  of  Christ,  into  which  we  are  received  by  baptism.  Under 
these  circumstances,  the  statement  of  Origen,(6)  who  derives  the 
custom  of  infant  baptism,  by  tradition,  from  the  apostles  themselves, 
seems  to  be  entitled  to  our  belief.  At  any  rate,  no  one,  even  of 
the  most  ancient  writers  of  the  church,  presumed  to  object  to  pedo- 
baptism  as  being  of  recent  origin  ;(7)  although  the  question  of  its 
propriety  was  often  agitated. 

Illustrations. 
I.  Children  were  to  be  instructed  in  the  principles  of  Chris- 
tianity.— Matt.  28:  20.  Eph.  6:  4.  The  principles  of  the  Essenes 
were  approved  of  and  regarded  with  admiration,  by  a  part  of  the 
Ephesians.  And  as  it  was  customary  among  the  Essenes  to  re- 
ceive strange  children  and  educate  them  in  their  principles,^  it  would 
certainly  have  been  altogether  unbecoming  Christian  parents,  to  be 
negligent  in  educating  their  own  children  in  the  doctrines  and  prin- 
ciples of  Christianity.  Hence  the  apostle  requires,  that  the  children 

>  Josephus  de  Bello  Judaico,  L.  IL  c.  8.  §  2. 


^  112.]  BAPTISM.  527 

Df  christian  parents  should  be  educated,  not  indeed  with  the  rigour 
if  the  Essenes  (for  to  this  an  allusion  is  doubtless  made  in  the  words 
*  provoke  not  your  children  to  anger,"  fit]  nagogyl^eTt  tcc  nxva 
vfi(ov,y  but  in  the  fear  and  admonition  of  the  Lord,^  according  to 
the  principles  and  directions  of  Jesus,  which  are  far  more  excellent 
than  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Essenes.  Col.  2:  8 — 10. 

II.  Children  were  to  be  made  disciples. — Matt.  28:  19.  Michaelis 
has  proved,  in  his  work  On  the  history  of  the  burial  and  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ  (p.  336  etc.)  that  the  word  fia^tjifvaazs  signifies  "  to 
make  disciples"  and  not  "  to  teach,"  [as  it  is  rendered  in  the  com- 
mon English  version.]  He  proves — 1.  that  no  example  can  be  ad- 
duced in  which  the  word  fxa&nTivetv  signifies  "  to  teach."  Nor 
could  the  word  in  the  present  case,  have  this  signification,  as  Christ 
afterwards  mentions  "  teaching,"  didaaitovieg,  specifically. — 2.  In 
Acts  14:  21,  the  word  fia&rjxeiistv  evidently  signifies  "  to  make  dis- 
ciples" [here  also  it  is  erroneously  rendered  "  taught"  in  the  com- 
mon English  version.]  This  sense  of  the  word  can  also  be  proved 
from  the  Fathers  of  the  church.  In  profane  authors  it  is  never  used 
in  a  transitive  sense,  though  it  frequently  is  used  intransitively  in 
the  very  sense  for  which  we  contend.  Matt.  27:  57,  "  to  be  a  dis- 
ciple," fia&fjT6viiv  xivi  Christ  probably  used  the  word  ^'i^bri , 
which  is  found  in  all  the  Oriental  translations  of  this  passage,  and 
which,  according  to  the  common  usage  signifies  "  to  make  disciples." 

Wetstein  also,  in  commenting  on  Matt.  28:  19,  has  proved  at 
much  length,  that  the  word  fiu&rjTsmip  may,  with  perfect  propriety, 
be  taken  here  in  that  general  sense,  in  which  children  are  also  em- 
braced in  it. 

III.  There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  baptism  itself,  which  could 
militate  against  its  administration  to  children.  Little  children  are 
indeed  unable  to  worship  God.  But  they  are  capable  of  receiving 
the  grace  of  God,  which  is  secured  to  them  by  baptism  ('^  1 10.) 
And  in  this  respect,  at  least,  they  may  be  said  to  be  made  disciples 
of  Jesus  by  baptism,  that  they  are,  by  this  ordinance  received  into 
the  nursery  of  God's  church,  into  the  school  established  for  the 
purpose  of  training  up  worshippers  for  him. 

IV.  The  silence  of  the  New  Testament  concerning  the  baptism 
of  children  accounted  for, — The  Jews  had  always  been  accustomed 
to  seeing  children  admitted  as  member's  of  the  church,  and  had 
never  heard  of  the  contrary  custom.  Hence  it  was  altogether  un- 
necessary for  Jesus  to  mention  little  children  in  particular  m  his 
command.    Matt.  28:  19.    On  the  contrary,  had  he  mtended  that 


•  1  Comp.  Col.  3:  21.  and  Note  51  in  Dissert.  II.  in  Epp.  add  Coloss. 

2  Tov\vQlov  instead   of  r(?  ^vglof  ^xi   education  wh|ch  is  pleasing  to   ^od, 
Which  promotes  the  glory  of  God.  See  Phil.  2:  30  in  the  Dissert,  on  that  Ep..tle. 


528  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IY. 

they  should  be  excluded,  it  would  have  been  much  more  necessary 
for  him  to  mention  the  particular  and  new  exception.  For  this 
same  reason  it  cannot  be  regarded  as  strange,  that  the  children  are  not 
mentioned,  specifically  in  the  accounts  of  baptisms,  contained  in  the 
New  Testament ;  for  their  reception  among  the  people  of  God  was 
nothing  new  or  unexpected,  and  they  are  also  not  mentioned  par- 
ticularly in  the  command  of  circumcisioH  (Acts  15:  1,  10.  Gal.  6: 
12,  13,)  although  no  one  will  contend  that  they  were  not  meant  to 
be  included  in  it.  And  in  perfect  accordance  with  this,  is  the  fact, 
that  the  baptism  of  women  is  particularly  mentioned  (Acts  8:  12,) 
for  it  was  something  strange,  as  the  old  initiatory  ceremony,  cir- 
cumcision, was  not  extended  to  them.  Nor  is  it  singular,  that  the 
few  fragments  of  the  works  of  uninspired  writers  of  the  earliest  age 
which  have  survived  the  desolations  of  time,  should  contain  nothing 
specific  on  this  subject ;  for  they  well  knew  that  the  practice  was 
no  where  objected  to  and  occasioned  no  dispute.  Some  passages, 
however,  are  found  in  these  writings,  which  do  not  indeed,  particu- 
larly discuss  infant  baptism,  but  which  speak  of  it  as  a  custom  uni- 
versally known  and  prevalent.  Thus  Irenaeus  in  speaking  of  this 
subject,  uses  the  following  language  :'^  "  Omnes  venit  (Christus) 
per  semetipsum  salvare,  omnes,  qui  per  eum  renascuntur  in  Deum, 
infantes,  et  parvulos,  et  pueros,  et  juvenes,  et  seniores,"  i.  e. 
"  Christ  came  to  bestow  salvation  upon  all  men,  upon  all  who  are 
dedicated  to  God  in  baptism,  who  are  regenerated  unto  God, 
whether  they  be  infants,  or  youths,  or  aged  persons."  Schroeckh, 
in  his  "  history  of  the  christian  church,"  (Pt.  III.  ed.  2.  p.  203 
etc.)  remarks,  that  the  word  renasci  commonly  signifies^  baptism  in 
the  writings  of  Irenaeus  and  Justin,  and  adduces  other  proof  of  the 
early  existence  of  pedobaptism.  Wall's  History  of  infant  baptism, 
which  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Schlosser,  with  notes,  deserves 
particular  attention  on  this  subject,  Pt.  I.  ch.  III.  See  also  Suicer's 
Thesaurus  (Tom.  I.  p.  647  ;)  Bingham's  Origines  ecclesiasticae  (L. 
XL  c.  4,)  and  Seiler's  Theolog.  dogm.  polem.  (p.  609.) 

V.  Baptism  was  instituted  in  place  of  circumcision. — We  find 
that  baptism  was  compared  to  circumcision,  even  as  early  as  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  as  is  evident  from  Col.  2:  11  etc.  negtitfAV^rjTS 
iv  tti  neQuofit)  xov  Xqioxov — avvTacftviig  uviw  Iv  rw  ^amioficcri 
in  whom  also  ye  are  circumcised  with  the  circumcision  of  Christ — - 
being  buried  with  him  in  baptism  etc.  In  the  Dialogue  of  Justin 
with  Trypho  the  Jew  (edit.  Colon,  p.  261,)  we  find   the  following 

1  Contra  Haereses,  L.  II.  c.  22.  §  4. 

2  For  a  clear  and  satisfactory  proof  of  this  point,  the  reader  may  consult  the 
learned  Dr.  Mosheim's  Sittenlehre,  Tom.  II.  p.  89,  III.  p.  275.  and  Wall's  Hist, 
of  Baptism,  Tom.  I.  p.  38. 


^  112.]  PEDOBAPTISM.  529 

passage :  "  We  have  not  received  bodily  circumcision,  but  spiritual 
circumcision  through  baptism  ;  and  all   are  equally  at  liberty  to  re- 
ceive this  ordinance,  iiaacv  bcftXov  vfiolcog  lafAfiavftv.''    It  is  evident 
from  another  passage  (p.  241,)  which  treats  of  the  fact  that  females 
were  not  circumcised,  that  the  meaning  of  this  sentence    is  that 
baptism  is  of  much   more  extended  application  than  corporeal  cir- 
cumcision, which  was  performed  only  on  males  ;  that  this  ordinance 
is  to  be  performed,  not  only  on  the  male  part  of  the  race  (which  in- 
cludes children,)  but  also  on  all,  without  exception,  even  on  females 
(as  to  children  there   is  not  even  any  question.)     It  is,  moreover, 
evident,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  in  the  institution  of  bap- 
tism, Christ  had  a  reference  to   circumcision,  just  as  he  had  to  the 
Passover,  in    the  institution  of  the    Holy  Supper   {§  109.  111.  4.) 
Just  as  instead  of  the  Paschal  supper,  which  was  a  new  ordinance 
under  the  old  covenant,  and  was  instituted  in  commemoration  of  the 
cardinal  blessing  bestowed  by  God  on  his  people,  at  the  time  when 
the   Passover    was  celebrated   the    first   tirae^ — just    as  instead  of 
this  Paschal  supper  the  Lord  introduced  the  Holy  Supper,  as  a  new 
ordinance  under  the  new  covenant,  in  commemoration  of  that  chief 
blessing  which  was   given  to  his  new  people  at  the   time  when  it 
was  first  celebrated  f  so  also  did  he  introduce  a  rite,  which  had 
been  known   before,  and  by  which  persons  were  to  be   admitted  to 
the  new  people  of  God,  and  set  apart  for  christian  instruction,  in- 
stead of  the  more  ancient  ceremony,  which  had  existed  previously 
to  the  time  of  Moses,^   and  by  which,  according  to  the  command  of 
Moses,^  the  members  of  God's  ancient  people  were  to  be  set  apart 
for  instruction  in  the  doctrine  and  precepts  of  Moses.^ 

VI.  The  testimony  of  Origen  on  this  subject,  is  found  in  his 
Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Rom.  6:  5 — 7.  Tom.  III.  fol.  178,  Paris, 
1512.  (Compare  Melancthon's  Loci  Theolog.  p.  447,  Leips.  1556.) 
"  Hence  there  was  a  tradition  derived  from  the  apostles,  that  chil- 
dren also  ought  to  be  baptized.  For  those  to  whom  the  divine 
mysteries  were  entrusted,  well  knew  that  the  contaminations  of  sin 
were  really  found  in  all,  which  ought  to  be  removed  by  water  and 
the  Spirit."'''     Wall  justly  remarks,  that  this  testimony  of  Origen 

1  Ex.  20:  2,  "  I  am  Jehovah,  thy  God,  who  brought  thee  out  of  Egypt ;"  with 
these  words  the  publication  of  the  Law  begins. 

2  Ex.  12:  17, 14,  24—27.  3  i  Cor.  11: 23.  Luke  22:  20—22. 
'    4  John  1:  25—28.  3:  22.  Comp.  §  109.  111.  4. 

^*    5  John  7:  22,  23.  Lev.  12:  3. 

6  Gal.  5.  3,  "  Every  one  that  is  circumcised,  is  bound  to  fulfil  the  law.'^  • 
Rom.  2:  25.  John  9:  28. 

7  "  Itaquo  et  ecclesia  ab  apostolis  traditionem  accepit,  etiam  parvulis  dare 
baptismum.  Sciebant  eiiim  illi,  quibus  secrcta  divinorum  mysteriorum  commen- 
datafuerunt,  quod  inessent  in  omnibus  genuinaesordcs  peccati,  quae  per  aquam 

.etSpiritum  aboleri  deberent." 

67 


530  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.   IV 

derives  double  weight  from  the  circumstance  that  he  was  descended 
from  christian  parents,  as  well  as  from  the  fact  that  he  possessed 
the  most  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  christian  church  in  all  the 
different  countries. 

VII.  No  ancient  author  ever  charged  infant  baptism  with  being 
an  innovation. — It  can  by  no  means  be  inferred  from  the  celebrated 
passage  of  Tertullian,  on  infant  baptism  (De  Baptismo,  c.  18,)  that 
the  custom  took  its  rise  at  that  time.     The  remark  of  Teller  (sup. 
cit.  p.  258,)  "  that  Tertullian,   who  lived  so  near  the  age  of  the 
apostles,  would  scarcely  have  spoken  against  the  practice,  if  it  had 
been  of  apostolic  origin,"  is  not  conclusive.     Otherwise,  we  should 
likewise  have  to  infer  from  the  same  passage,  that  the  baptism  of 
unmarried  persons,  had  also  been   deferred   previously  to  the  days 
of  Tertullian,  and  had  not  been  hastened  until  his  time.     For,  he 
dissuades  them   from  administering  baptism,  not  only  to  children, 
but  also  (non   minore  de  causa)  to  all   persons  in  single  life.     He 
admits  that  it  is  customary  in  the  christian  church  to  baptize  infants, 
when  he  laments  that   "  the  age  of  innocence  (infancy)  hastens  to  . 
obtain  pardon  of  sins,"  (Quid  festinat  innocens  aetas  ad  remission- 
em  peccatorum  ?)     And  he  does  not  allege  that  infant  baptism  was 
a  recent  custom,  but  supports  his  advice  by  arguments  drawn  from 
his  particular  ideas  of  the  importance  of  the  ordinance  of  baptism, 
and  of  the   situation  of  the   subjects  on  whom  it   is  administered. 
Schlosser,  in  a  note  appended  to  his  translation  of  the  passage  of 
Wall  (sup.  cit.  c.  IV.  <5.   VIII,  IX)  referring  to  this  subject,  re- 
marks, that  as  Tertullian  attributed  so  high  an  importance  to  apos- 
tolical tradition,  he  would  undoubtedly  have  referred  to  it  in  support 
of  his  opinion  in  this  case,  if  he  had  not  known  that  pedobaptism 
was  customary  in  the  earlier  ages.    The  position  above  maintained, 
also  derives  additional  confirmation  from  the  fact,  that  the  authority 
of  Tertullian,  and  the  arguments  which  he  adduced  against  infant 
baptism,  which   would   easily  have   produced  a  change  in  the  cus- 
tom, if  it  had  been  of  recent  origin,  produced  not  the  least  effect  on 
this  ancient  rite  ;  and  that,  at  the  time  when  the  question  was  agi- 
tated, *'  Whether  the  custom  of  baptizing  children  on  the  second 
or  third  day  after  their  birth,  should  be  preserved ;  or  whether,  in 
allusion  to  circumcision,  they  ought  not  to  be  baptized  before  the 
eighth  day  ?"    not  a   single    bishop   in    Africa,  not  even    Cyprian 
(Epist.  LXIV,)   who  was    so  partial  to  Tertullian's   views,  even 
mentioned  the  opinion  of  Tertullian,  or  hinted  that  a  minister  had 
lately  lived   at  Carthage,  who  not  only  entertained  different  views 
as  to  the  proper  time  for  the  baptism  of  children,  but  who  rejected 
infant  baptism  altogether.^     Finally,  our  position  derives  additional 

1  See  the  view  of  the  history  of  infant  baptism  during  the  first  three  centuries^ 
given  in  MUnscher's  Dogmengeschichte,  Vol,  2,  p.  341 — 353. 


*§>  113.]  THE  lord's  SUPPER.  531 


proof  also  from  the  case  of  the  Pelagians  (in  the  fifth  century.) 
They  found  it  very  difficult  to  reconcile  infant  baptism  with  their 
doctrines  ;  and,  if  they  had  been  able  to  assail  the  custom,  would 
undoubtedly  have  done  so.  But  they  defended  themselves  with 
the  utmost  zeal  against  the  charge  of  slighting  infant  baptism,  pro- 
nounced it  false  with  the  greatest  displeasure  ;  but  never  thought  of 
alleging  that  the  custom  was  not  of  apostolical  authority. 

The  custom  of  administering  baptism  only  at  particular  holydays, 
was  introduced  at  a  later  date  ;  and  Bingham  has  proved,  that  at 
these  holy-day  baptisms,  the  ordinance  was  administered  to  chil- 
dren. Origines  Eccles.  L.  XL  c.  VI.  §  IX.  L.  X.  c.  IV.  «5.  XIV. 


SECTION    CXI  II. 


Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
The  second   ordinance  which  our  Lord  instituted,  was  the  Holy 
Supper.     He  commanded  that  this  ordinance  should  frequently  be 
celebrated. (1)     It   consists  of  the  solemn(2)  participation  of  bread 
and(3)  wine,  in  commemoration(4)  of  his  death. (5) 

Illustrations. 
I.     The  obligation  and  mnemonick  nature  of  the  Holy  Supper. 
— It  is  admitted  {§  1 14.  111.  11,)  that  the  design  of  the  first  cele- 
bration of  the  Holy  Supper,  was  to  confirm  the  prediction  of  the 
approaching  death  of  Christ.  Matt.  26:  26 — 28.    But  it  is  also  evi- 
dent, even  from  the  narrative  of  Matthew,  that  Christ  had  likewise 
a  farther  object  in  view,  and  certainly  intended,  what  Paul  also  men- 
tions as  a  command  of  God  (1  Cor.  11:  23 — 25,)  that  this  sacred 
ordinance  should  in  future  be  repeated  in  memory  of  him.     For,  in 
Matt.  26:  28,  Christ  regards  this  ordinance  as  the  feast  of  the  New 
Covenant,  or  as  a  feast  which  had  reference  to  the  chief  blessing  of 
the  New  Covenant,  to  aTf^a  lo  trjg  xaivrjg  di^ct&iJKrjg  to  negl  noXXtav 
ixxvvofievov;  just  as  the  paschal  supper,  with  which  Jesus  con- 
nected it,  was  instituted  in  commemoration  of  the  cardinal  blessing 
of  the  Old  Covenant.     Ex:  12:  14,  ]i^3t^  t]:?b  nn  t]i'«n  n^rjT 
this  day  shall  be  a  memorial  unto  you.  Comp.  4  H^-  ^^^'  ^-  '^{^^^ 
it  was  really  the  paschal  supper,  and  not  an  ordinary  meal,  at  which 
Jesus  was  engaged,  is  proved  in  Gabler's  New  Theol.  Journal,^  in 
opposition  to  the  contrary  opinion  of  former  divines, 
i  Vol.  13.  p.  472—484,  and  Paulus'  Comment,  on  the  New  Test.  Ft.  III.  p.  535. 


532  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

But,  independently  of  these  circumstances,  the  command  of  the 
apostle,  who  spake  on  the  authority  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  is  sufficient 
for  any  Christian  ;  and  the  apostle  commands  that  the  Holy  Sup- 
per, or  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  shall  be  repeated  until  the  end  of 
the  world.  In  1  Cor.  10:  21,  Paul  calls  this  ordinance,  "  the  Lord's 
Table,''  xgnne^a  ^typ/ot-,  and  in  11:  20,  "the  Lord's  Supper," 
'AVQia^iov  dslnvov;  and  Tertullian  denominates  it,  "  convivium 
dominicum."!  That  it  is  to  be  celebrated  often,  is  enjoined  in  1 
Cor.  11:  26,  oGdvug  "  as  often"  as  ye  eat  and  drink  etc.  10: 16 — 2L 
Acts  2:  42,  they  continued  stedfastly  in  the  breaking  of  bread  etc. 
Comp.  ^  109.  111.  3.  1  Cor.  11:  26,  shew  forth  the  Lord's  death 
till  he  come.  v.  23.  See  ^J,  10.  111.  6. 

II.  Ordinarily  it  ought  to  be  celebrated  in  public. — The  nature 
of  the  Holy  Supper  is  such  as  to  dictate  its  celebration  in  the  con- 
gregation of  Christians,  as  being  most  consistent  with  its  design.  1 
Cor.  11:20 — 34.^  This  celebration  under  these  circumstances, 
accords  best  with  the  fact  of  its  being  a  public  commemoration^  of 
the  death  of  Christ  as  the  principal  blessing  of  the  New  Covenant; 
and  is,  at  the  same  time,  best  adapted  to  cement  our  union  with 
that  church,  which  professes  to  worship  Jesus  as  her  Redeemer,  <§> 
108.  But  by  no  means  follows,  that  the  private  celebration  of  this 
ordinance  is,  under  all  circumstances,  to  be  discountenanced  ;  if  the 
design  of  the  person  desiring  it  be  a  correct  one.  1  Cor.  11:  22. — 
Reinhard's  Dogm.  p.  603.  For,  even  in  this  case  also,  there  is  a 
public  profession  made  before  the  minister  of  the  Gospel  who  ad- 
ministers the  ordinance,  and  the  friends  who  are  usually  present ; 
and  it  may  be  regarded  as  a  public  profession,  inasmuch  as  the  fact 
that  the  ordinance  has  been  celebrated  by  a  particular  individual, 
becomes  publicly  known.  Herder  remarks,  "  Did  not  Christ  say, 
Where  two  or  three  of  you  are  gathered  together,  I  will  be  with 
you  ? — Friends  and  family  constitute  a  communion. — Remember 
that  Christ  himself  was  the  father  of  a  family,  when  he  instituted 
the  ordinance — that  family  consisted  of  his  friends."  Sup.  cit.  p. 
164  etc. 

III.  The  participation  of  both  wine  and  bread  are  necessary 
to  this  ordinance. —  1  Cor.  11:  26,  for  as  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread 

1  L.  II.  ad  uxorem,  comp.  Ernesti  Theses  Dogm.  P.  II.  Thes.  XXII. 

2  Boehmer's  Dissert,  quart.  Jur.  Eccles.  Antiq.  ad  Plinium  secundum. 

3  1  Cor.  11:  26,  xara/ytAAfrf.  Compare  Ex.  13:  8,  where  it  is  commanded 
that  the  circumstances  of  the  deliverance  from  Egypt,  should  be  explained  to 
the  children  at  the  feast  of  the  Passover.  Buxtorf  remarks  (in  his  Lex.  Chald. 
p.  1295,)  that  the  prayerbook  of  the  Jews  contains  a  narrative  of  the  feast  of  the 
passover  or  Haggada,  which  they  are  in  a  habit  of  reading  on  the  first  night  of 
the  feast.  See  Engelken  Comment,  super  argumento  e  verbis  Pauli,  1  Cor.  11- 
26  deprompto. 


^113.}  THE  lord's  SUPPER.  533 


and  drink  this  cup,  v.  27,  whosoever  shall  eat  this  bread  and 
drink  this  cup  v.  28,  so  let  him  eat  of  this  bread  and  drink  of  this 
cup  V.  29.  10:  16,  the  cup — the  bread,  v.  21,  the  cup  of  the  Lord 
— the  Lord's  table.  See  on  this  subject  Spittler's  history  of  the 
cup  in  the  Eucharist. 

IV.    Of  the  subjects  of  this  ordinance. — The  public  administra- 
tion of  the  Holy  Supper,  may  cherish  the  recollection  of  the  death 
'  of  Christ,  even  in   the  minds  of  those  who  do  not  partake  of  the 
I  ordinance  themselves.* — And  even  those  who  are  not  sincere  in  the 
I  reception  of  this  ordinance,  and   who  do  not  partake  of  it  with  the 
j  design  of  perpetuating  the  memory  of  Jesus,  still  cooperate,  though 
I  unintentionally,  in  accomplishing  this  object.^     But  the  omniscient 
''  Lord,  whose  memory  is  celebrated,  cannot  regard  with  approbation 
those  communicants,  who  approach  his  table  in  a  thoughtless  man- 
,  ner,^  without  reflection  on  the  importance  of  the  ordinance,  or  the 
:  proper  manner  of  receiving  it,  and  who  do  not  really  appreciate  the 
;  blessing  of  the  Saviour's  death,  though  they  publicly  profess  to  do 
I  so.     On  the  other  hand,  the  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  his;  he 
I  can  well  discriminate  between  him  who  approaches  the  sacred  board 
;  with  a  thankful  and  reverent  heart,  and  those  whose  admission  to 
I  the  table  is,  just  like  their  reception  into  the  church,  an  evil  which 
'  cannot  be  remedied.     2  Tim.  2:  19.  Luke  22:  19—21.     The  Sa- 
viour suffered  Judas  to  be  present,  at  the  institution  of  the  Holy 
Supper.     According  to  the  custom  of  the  Jews,  no  one  was  per- 
mitted to  withdraw,  until  the  Paschal  Supper  was  finished  :  and 
therefore  it  cannot  be  inferred  from  John  13:  30,*  that  Judas  had 
previously  retired. 

It  is  evident  from  the  nature  of  the  Holy  Supper,  that,  like  the 
Paschal  Supper  of  old,  it  was  not  intended  for  children.  And  as 
this  ordinance,  unlike  that  of  baptism,  is  not  intended  indiscrimin- 
ately for  all  without  regard  to  age  ;  it  is  proper  that  the  Holy  Sup- 
per should  be  withheld  even  from  those  children  who  are  entering 
on  the  years  of  reflection,  until  they  are  able  to  discern  the  proper 
and  peculiar  nature  of  this  sacred  ordinance.  1  Cor.  11:  29.  Mi- 
chaehs'  Dogmatik  <§>  191. 

i  ,  V.  The  atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  commemorated  hy  this 
ordinance.— 'I  Cor.  11:  24,  this  is  my  body  which  is  broken  for 
you ;  do  this  in  remembrance  of  me,  v.  26,  as  often  as  ye  eat  this 
bread,  and  drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  [publish  ^ctTctyyiXXext]  the 
Lord's  death  till  he  come.     Luke  22:  19,  this  is  ray  body  which  is 


1  1  Cor.  11:  26.  Exod.  12:  26.  13:  8.  corap.  III.  2. 

2  Melanchthonis  Loci  theol.  p.  454.  Cheranitzii  Loci  theol.  Ft.  III.  p.  149.  ed. 
Francof,  et  Witteberg,  1690. 

3  1  Cor.  11:  28  31.  ^  Michaelis'  Dogmatik,  p.  539. 


534  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.   IV. 

given  for  you,  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me.  Matt.  26:  28,  drink 
ye  all  of  it,  for  this  is  my  blood  of  the  new  covenant,  which  is  shed 
for  many,  for  the  remission  of  sins. 


SECTION   CXIV. 


i 


Benefits  of  the  Lorcfs  Supper — Christ  present  at  its  celebration. 

All  those  who  partake  of  the  Lord's  supper  in  a  proper  manner 
{ovx  aval'naq  1  Cor.  1 1 :  27,  29,)  are  not  only  inspired  with  chris- 
tian confidence(l)  and  excited  to  piety, (2)  by  the  remembrance 
of  the  death  of  Christ ;  but  such  is  the  nature  of  this  ordinance,  that 
they  may  cherish  the  pleasing(3)  and  salutary  belief  of  the  pres- 
ence of  the  glorified  Redeemer,  who  formerly  laid  down  his  life  for 
them.  We  may  indeed,  without  violating  the  laws  of  exegesis,  ex- 
plain the  words  Matt.  26:  26,  28.  Mark  14:  22,  24.)  "  this  is  my 
body — this  is  my  blood" — thus(4)  "  this  bread  and  this  wine(5) 
are  the  emblems  [signs] (6)  of  my  body  and  my  blood."  But  this 
interpretation  is  not  accordant  either  with  the  words  of  the  institution, 
(7)  which  Paul  declares  he  received  from  the  Lord  (1  Cor.  11:  23;) 
or  with  the  explanation  of  Paul  himself,  according  to  which(8)  the 
meaning  of  Christ's  words,  recorded  by  Matthew  and  Mark,  is  this  : 
*^  This  bread  confers(9)  my  body  upon  you — this  wine  gives  you 
[exhibits,  offers]  my  blood."  Christ  promised  his  disciples,  at  the 
institution  of  this  ordinance, (10)  that,  although  he  was  about  to  pass 
over  into  another  life,  he  would  nevertheless  be  present  whenever 
they  celebrated  this  supper ;  that  his  body  which  was  to  be  offered 
up,  and  his  blood  which  was  to  be  shed,(ll)  would,  according  to  his 
promise,  as  assuredly  be  present,  as  they  beheld  the  bread  and 
wine  before  them.  The  very  Je3us(12)  whom  they  beheld  before 
them,  whose  human  blood  they  would  soon  see  shed,  whose  human 
body  they  would  soon  see  die  ;  but  who,  at  the  same  time,  possess- 
ed divine  perfections(13)  or  who  is  the  Son  of  God,  promised  that 
he  would  be  present  at  every  solemnization  of  such  a  supper  as  thatl 
which  they  then  once  celebrated  during  his  earthly  existence  ;  andj 
that  after  his  death  and  liberation  from  all  human  sufferings,  he. 


§>  114.]  THE  lord's  supper.  535 

Ljivould  nevertheless  be  present,  and  that  this  presence,  by  which  the 
pkuilt  of  irreverent  communicants  is  aggravated, (14)  should  have  a 
[jvery  salutary  influence  on  those,  who  partake  of  this  supper  with  up- 
:  right  intentions.(15) 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  Eucharist  is  calculated  to  inspire  us  with  christian  con-r 
fidence. — The  worthy  communicants  at  the  Lord's  table,  receive 
bread  and  wine  as  the  visible  pledge  of  their  personal  interests  in 
the  benefits  of  the  atonement,  particularly  the  pardon  of  their  sins. 
Matt.  26:  28,  for  the  remission  of  sins.  See  <§»  89.  Mark  14:  24, 
atf^ia  Tiegl  noXXiav  {vneg  vf.imv)  h%vv6[Aivov,  blood  shed  for  many  (for 
you.)  Luke  22:  19.  1  Cor.  11:  24,  owfia  vneg  v^auv  didofxivov 
(xXo)fi€vov)  body  given  for  you  (broken.)  Heb.  13:  10,  "  The  Jew- 
ish priests  have  no  right  to  eat  from  our  altar,"  i.  e.  to  enjoy  the 
blessings  of  his  death. ^ 

II.  The  contemplation  of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  a  death  en- 
dured for  the  purpose  of  purchasing  pardon  for  sins,  must  naturally 
excite  us  to  a  life  of  virtue.     See  <§>  92  supra. 

III.  Those  who,  after  mature  and  unprejudiced  investigation,  are 
not  able  to  persuade  themselves  of  the  truth  of  this  peculiar  view  of 
the  Holy  Supper,  (which,  when  we  consider  the  mysteriousness  of 
the  doctrine,  and  the  inconclusiveness  of  many  of  the  arguments 
often  adduced  in  support  of  it,  is  a  very  possible  case,)  cannot  in- 
deed derive  consolation  and  encouragement  from  a  doctrine  which 
they  do  not  believe.  But  the  blessing  itself  does  not  depend  on  us 
or  our  views  of  the  doctrine,  but  on  the  divine  agency  of  the  Lord. 
Hence,  if  they  do  their  duty,  and  endeavour  to  partake  of  the  ordi- 
nance with  proper  intentions,  and  with  a  grateful  recollection  of  the 
death  of  Jesus,  they  may  still,  though  unknown  to  themselves,  be- 
come partakers  of  the  blessing  thus  conferred.^  It  is,  therefore,  to 
be  regarded  as  a  matter  of  just  congratulation,  that  those  violent  and 
bitter  contentions  have  been  buried  in  oblivion,  which  formerly  ha- 
rassed the  Protestant  churches,  and  in  which,  as  Luther  himself 
confessed,  the  theologians  of  our  church  also  were  hurried  into  too 
great  extremes.^ 

IV.     The  words  of  our  Lord  "  This  is  my  body  etc."  may  in- 
deed be  explained  figuratively,    without  violence  to  the  usus  lo- 

1  Comment  in  loc. 

2  Weismann'slnstitut.  theol.exegetico-dogra.p.932.  §  31.  sq.  Seller's  Theol. 
dogm.  polem.  p.  633.  Mori  Epit.  Theol.  christ.  p.  270. 

3  See  Schwab's  Dissert,  de  jure  protest,  examinandi  religionem  suam,  §  66. 


536  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV, 

quendi  of  the  New  Testament.  The  figure  thus  assumed,  would 
not  be  an  uncommon  one  (see  111.  6.)  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  the 
nature  of  the  case  altogether  forbids  the  supposition  of  the  language 
being  figurative.  For  it  cannot  be  denied  that  some  of  the  language 
used  in  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Supper,  is  figurative  [tropical] 
111.  5,  6.  And  even  the  Lutheran  opinion  of  a  propositio  exhihiti- 
va  contained  in  the  words  of  the  institution,  evidently  presupposes 
figurative  language.  See  111.  9,  infra.^  It  has  been  urged,  that  the 
language  of  Jesus  is  the  language  of  a  testament,  and  consequently 
must  be  understood  literally.  But  Morus^  and  Michaelis^  have  both 
remarked,  that  the  word  dia^rjicrj  does  not  here  signify  testament, 
but  covenant.  And  the  latter  justly  adds  that  the  phrase  oco^aj 
xlcifievov  body  broken,  is  indisputably  figurative.  I 

V.  The  word  "  this,"  roiJro,  in  the  proposition  ^'  For  this  is  myr 
blood"  (Matt.  26:  28.  Mark  14:  24,)  refers  to  the  preceding  word| 
**  cup,"  notriQiov,  and  the  '^  cup"  is  used  figuratively  for  the  wine. 
Examples  of  the  same  nature,  are  found  in  1  Cor.  11:  26  etc.  10: 
21.  Matt.  10:  42,  in  which  the  word  "  cup"  is  used  to  signify  that 
which  the  cup  contained.  Thus  also,  in  the  words  "  this  is  my 
body,"  the  pronoun  "  this,"  zovxo,  is  placed  instead  of  the  "  bread" 
(uQiov  1  Cor.  10:  16)  which  Jesus  gave  his  disciples  to  eat ;  al- 
though the  gender  of  the  pronoun  does  not  correspond  to  that  of 
the  subject  agtog,  but  of  the  predicate  aw(xa. 

For  cases  of  similar  construction,  see  Gal.  4:  24.  (111.  6.)  Matt. 
7:  12,  ovTog  iativ  6  v6y.og  etc.  instead  of  tovto  etc.  See  Dissert.  I, 
in  Libros  N.  T.^histor.  Note  32.  Eph.  1:  14,  o?  instead  of  o.  3:  13, 
^'r^?  instead  o{  aiviveg.  1  Cor.  3:  17,  oiz'tv eg  instead  o(  ogtig. 

VI.  The  interpretations  of  Zwinglius  and  Oecolampadius. — 
It  is  a  matter  of  little  moment,  whether,  with  the  former,  we  trans- 
late the  words  of  the  institution  thus :  "  This  indicates  my  body 
and  my  blood  ;"  or  with  the  latter,  "  this,  which  I  here  extend  to 
you,  is  a  '  sign'  of  my  body  and  my  blood."^  In  both  cases,  the 
thing  itself  is,  according  to  a  customary  figure  of  speech,^  placed 
for  the  sign  of  the  thing;  and  the  phrases,  "  this  is  a  sign  of  the 
thing"  and,  "  this  signifies  or  indicates  that  thing,"  are  equivalent. 
Thus^  in  Gal.  4:  24,  the  words  ccvtcci  (instead  of  Tavza)  eiol  dvo 
dicx&fjxai^  may  be  rendered  "  this  is  a  sign  of  the  two  covenants," 
or  this  signifies  the  two  covenants."  I  shall  offer  no  remarks  on 
Rev.  17:  9  etc.  12:  15,  and  other  passages,  which  are  usually  ad- 

1  Toellner's  vermischte  Aufsaetze.  B.  2.  Samml.  2.  S.  180  f. 

2  Sup.  cit.  p.  269.  3  Dogmatik.  p.  652. 

4  Plank's  Geschichte  de?s  protest.  Lehrbegriffs,  Th.  2.  S.  259,273. 

5  See  Observv.  ad  analog,  et.  syntaxin  Hebraicam  pertinentes,  p.  18.  note  5. 
Dissert,  in  Epist.  ad  Corinth.  Note  59.  Fischer  de  vitiis  Lex.  N.T. 


^114.]  THK  lord's  SUPPER.  537 

duced^  in  support  of  this  form  of  expression,  as  the  preceding  ob- 
servations may  easily  be  applied  to  them.  But,  according  to  the 
analogy  of  the  Hebrew  language,  the  substantive  verb  is  usually 
wanting  in  the  sentences  which  contain  such  a  trope,  and  the  figure 
is  more  usually  found  in  the  noun  which  is  expressed.^  Thus  in 
Ezek.  12:  10,  the  words  t^ini— ntn  ^W2Ti  .VtJsrt  must  evidently 
be  translated,  "  this  carrying  (of  the  *  stuff'  or  preparation  for  re- 
moving or  for  wandering  v.  6)  is  a  sign  [symbol]  of  the  (wandering) 
Israelites  and  their  princes  ;"  and  not  thus  :  '-  This  carrying  signi- 
fies the  prince  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Israelites."  And  the  word 
dtDi{)t]xr]v  covenant,  itself  is  used  figuratively  in  other  passages  be- 
side the  one  adduced  Gal.  4:  24.  In  Acts  7:  8,  we  read  tdojitev 
avTM  dia07]X7]if  Tiegtxof^ifjg  "  he  gave  him  a  sign  of  the  covenant, 
which  was  circumcision."^  Compare  Gen.  17:  10  with  v.  11, 
'n'^na— n"''i3  nli^.  Similar  lo  this  in  the  expression  al^ia  dia&ijxrig 
instead  ofaliia,  dta&y^y,}].  Heb.  9:  20.  10:  29.  13:  20.  Matt.  26: 
2S.  Mark  14:  24,  "  the  blood  which  is  a  sign  of  the  covenant." 
Nay,  this  figure  occurs  in  the  very  words  of  the  institution.  1  Cor. 
11:  25.  Luke  22:  20,  iovto  to  iiot^qlov  ri  v.aivy]  dca&^xtj  iv  tea 
aif^tarl  f.tov,  to  vTiig  vfiwv  iyij^vvo^^vov  "  this  wine  (see  111.  5)  is  the 
sign  of  the  new  covenant,  which  is  formed  through  my  blood  :" 
to  iY.yvvofiavov  is  placed  for  ro7  h^ivvofxivM — a  mode  of  construction 
which  is  also  found  in  Rev.  9:  14.  3:  12.  Luke  20:  27  ;  and  of 
which  other  additional  examples  are  noticed  by  Bengel  in  his  Gno- 
mon, on  Luke  22:  20. 

Vil.  Examination  of  the  words  of  the  institution  themselves. — 
1  Cor.  11:  25.  Luke  22.  20.  (See  111.  6.)  If  the  words,  "  this 
cup  is  the  new  covenant,"  which,  according  to  Paul  and  Luke, 
Christ  used  at  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Supper,  are  to  correspond 
to  the  synonymous  words  given  in  Matthew  and  Mark,  "  this  (cup) 
is  mv  blood,"  just  as  the  words  "this  is  my  body"  are  given  alike 
by  all  the  four  Evangelists  and  by  Paul  (in  1  Cor.  1 1 :  24 ;)  then 
we  cannot,  with  Oecolampadius,  translate  the  words  "  the  blood  of 
Christ,"  to  aJ^ia  zov  XgiQioZ,  sign  [symbol]  of  the  blood  of  Christ." 
For,  it  is  the 'blood  of  Christ  itself,  and  not  the  sign  of  that  blood, 
which  is  the  sign  of  the  New  Covenant.  It  was  by  the  blood  of 
Christ  itself,  and  not  by  a  sign  of  his  blood,  that  the  New  Cove- 
nant was  sanctioned  ;  hence,  in  I  Cor.  11:  25.  Luke  22:  20  the 
words  "  in  my  blood"  are  expressly  added.  The  sign  of  the  New 
Covenant  which   was  made  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  is  that  blood 


1  Michaelis  Dogm.  p.  652.     Heddaeus  on  Matt.  26: 26,  p.  401. 

2  Chemnitii  fundamenta  sanae  doctrinae  etc.  p.  33. 

3  The  genitive  ^sqno^ri?  is  the  genitive  of  apposition.  SeeObeervv.  p.  104  etc, 

68 


538  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV.    ' 

\ 

itself.  But  that  which  Paul  and  Luke  call  the  sign  of  the  New  } 
Covenant,  which  was  made  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  is,  according  to 
Matthew  and  Mark,  the  blood  of  the  New  Covenant,  to  aT/Aa  li^g 
xatprjg  diwdrjKjjg.  Hence,  Matthew  and  Mark  are  speaking,  not  of 
a  mere  sign  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  but  of  that  blood  itself,  of  that 
blood  which  is  a  sign  of  the  New  Covenant.  Libri  Symbolici.  p. 
740  etc. 

Michaelis  is  of  opinion,  that  the  variety  of  expression  in  the 
words  of  the  institution,  is  probably,  not  the  arbitrary  circumlocution 
of  the  narrators,  but  the  words  of  Jesus  himself,  who  in  handing 
about  the  bread  and  wine,  expressed  the  same  thing  in  different 
words.     Sup.  cit.  p.  649. 

VIII.  St.  PauVs  explanation  of  the  words  of  the  institution. — 
The  design  of  Paul,  in  the  passage  1  Cor.  ch.  10,  was,  to  warn  the 
Corinthians  against  the  temptation  to  be  present  at  the  pagan  sacri- 
ficial feasts  (v.  14.)  The  consideration  which  he  urges  on  them,  is, 
that  those  who  attend  their  religious  feasts,  thereby  avow  them- 
selves worshippers  of  the  pagan  deity,  in  honour  of  whom  the  feast 
is  celebrated  (v.  18:  20.)  Just  as  those  who  partook  of  those  pa- 
gan feasts,  professed  themselves  to  be  worshippers  of  the  pagan 
deities,  and  to  be  connected  with  them  (v.  20 ;)  so  also  do  those 
who  partake  of  the  Holy  Supper,  profess  themselves  to  be  wor- 
shippers of  Christ,  and  thereby  enter  into  connexion  with  him  as 
members  of  his  body  (v.  22;)  and  that  their  conduct  would  be  in- 
consistent in  the  highest  degree,  if,  on  the  one  hand,  they  should 
profess  themselves  worshippers  of  Christ  by  receiving  his  Supper, 
and,  on  the  other,  declare  themselves  worshippers  of  the  pagan 
deities  by  partaking  of  their  feasts  (v.  22  ;)  and  that  God,  whose 
power  is  superior  to  that  of  every  other  being,  would  not  suffer  such 
an  insult  to  his  character  to  go  unpunished  (v.  22.)  In  this  res- 
pect, the  Holy  Supper  and  the  pagan  feast  resemble- each  other. — 
But  the  caution  in  v.  19,  presupposes,  that  the  apostle  attributed  a 
peculiar  influence  to  the  Holy  Supper,  which  he  was  apprehensive 
some  might  suppose  he  meant,  by  his  comparison,  to  ascribe  also 
to  the  pagan  festivals.  But  the  object  of  the  apostle  is,  to  inform 
them,  that  although  their  attendance  at  the  feasts  of  those  deities 
(which  are  nothing  10:  19,)  could  not  place  them  into  the  same 
union  with  those  idols,  as  that  into  which  the  Holy  Supper  brings  I 
the  Christian  with  Christ  (who  is  the  Mighty  Lord  v.  22.  8:  6  ;) 
still  by  attending  those  feasts,  they  became  united  to  those  idols,  as  j 
far  as  the  encouragement  of  their  idolatry  produced  such  a  union, 
itoivMPOvg  Twi/ daif^iovlojvylvsod^ai.  That  although  the  pagan  idols 
are  "  nothing"  and  cannot  exert  any  influence  on  the  things  sacri- 
ficed unto  them,  and  although  the  things  thus  sacrificed  cannot  poi- 
son any  one  (v.  19.  8:  4,)  and  the  meats  that  remain  of  their  feasts,  i 


*§>  114.]  THE  lorb's  supper.  539 

are,  in  themselves  considered,  no  more  injurious  than  any  other 
meat  (10:  25 — 30  ;)  still  do  those  who  participate  in  the  demon- 
strations of  honour  paid  to  the  deities  at  those  feasts,  thereby  dis- 
honour Christ  (10;  20,  2-2.)  For,  the  heathen  honour  their  deities 
at  their  festivals,  as  the  Christians  honour  Christ  in  the  Eucharist, 
and  as  the  Israelites  honoured  God  by  their  sacrifices  (v.  18,  20.) 
But  it  is  indeed  a  fearful  thing  to  dishonour  Christ,  inasmuch  as 
Jesus,  in  honour  of  whom  the  Holy  Supper  is  commemorated,  is 
not  an  impotent  idol  (v.  22.  comp.  11:  27,  29,)  but  is  the  Lord  (v. 
21)  whose  power  and  influence  are  undoubted,  and  in  whose  pres- 
ence and  agency,  Christians  in  the  most  solemn  manner  profess  to 
believe,  by  that  holy  sacrament  of  which  they  partake  in  honour  of 
him  (v.  16.)  Now,  that  all  Christians  are  one  body  of  Christ  (12: 
12 — 27,)  just  as  the  bread  is  one,  of  which  they  all  partake  in  the 
Eucharist  (10:  16,  21,)  and  that  therefore  they  all,  as  members  of 
the  body  of  Christ  (Eph.  5:  23 — 32,)  ought  to  worship  Christ  and 
trust  to  his  providence  (ibidem,)  the  apostle  infers,  in  v.  17,  from 
the  fact  that  they  all  partake  of  the  same  bread,  of  that  bread  which 
makes  them  partakers  of  the  body  of  Christ  (v.  16.)  But  it  is  evi- 
dent that  by  "  body  of  Christ,"  in  this  verse,  is  not  meant,  as  in  v. 
17,  the  Church  of  Christ,  but  the  body  of  Christ,  which,  in  the 
Holy  Supper,  is  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  blood  (which 
never  signifies  the  church)  of  Christ  (11:  27,)  that  is,  the  body  of 
Christ  which  was  sacrificed  for  us.  As  all  partake  of  the  same  sa- 
cred bread,  which  communicates  to  us  the  body  of  Christ,  all  also 
partake  of  the  same  body  (and  blood)  of  Christ  (10:  17,  16,)  as 
Christ  says,  "  he  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood, 
dwelleth  in  me  and  I  in  him."  John  6:  56.  Hence  also,  all  are 
'inited  to  the  same  Christ,  and  consequently  to  one  another,  John 
17:  21,  23,  "  that  they  may  be  one  in  us— I  in  them— that  they 
may  be  made  perfect  in  one."  They  are  therefore  one  body,  or 
one  people  of  Christ,  who  are  to  worship  Christ  and  not  the  pagan 
idols,  and  who  are  authorized  to  expect  a  presence  and  agency  of 
Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  such  as  the  votaries  of  pagan  deities,  which 
are  mere  imaginary  beings,  have  no  right  to  expect  from  them  (v. 
19.)  The  16th  verse  I  translate  thus  :  '*  the  salutary^  cup  which 
we  give  and  receive^  with  thanksgiving,  is  it  not  the  communication* 

'  John  6:  35,  48.  compare  the  expression  Hqtos  ttj?  tojyg  with  v.  33,  tf'ipTOfr 
t(07p/  Sidovs  Toi  xoofKo.  V.  57  etc. 

2  Thus  I  translate  the  words  to  Ttoxr,qiov  rijg^  svloytae  and  o  svloyovfiev—so 
that  these  phrases  may  not  be  tautological.  EvXoyelv  is  used  in  the  latter  sense, 
in  Mark  14:  22.  comp.  v.  23.  1  Cor.  11:  24.  Luke  22:  19,  where  tiyaQiaTti.v  la 
used  instead  o^ avloyatv.       Compare  Luke  9:  16.  John  6:  11.  Mark  8:  6. 

3  This  (communication)  is  also  the  meaning  of  mtviovia  in  Heb.  13:  10-  Se© 
Schleusner's  Lex.  in  voc.  No.  1. 


540  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

of  the  blood  of  Christ  ?  [does  it  not  make  us  partakers  of  Christ's 
blood  ?] — the  bread^  which  we  brake  and  distribute  amongst  us,  is 
it  not  the  communication  of  the  body  of  Christ?  [is  not  the  body  of 
Christ  thereby  given  us?"J  that  is,  "the  reception  of  the  bread  and 
wine  makes  us  partakers  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ."  Ac- 
cording to  the  explanation  of  Paul,  therefore,  the  sense  of  thewords 
of  the  institution,  is  this :  ''  This  wine  is  that  by  which  the  sign  of 
the  new  covenant  which  is  made  .by  my  blood,  is  communicated  ; 
or,  this  wine  is  that  by  w^hich  my  blood  is  given  you," — and  "  this 
bread  is  that  which  communicates  to  you  my  body."  There  is  this 
difterence  between  the  Lord's  Supper  and  all  other  feasts,  that  in 
the  former  there  is  not  only  visible  food,  but  also  nourishment  of  a 
peculiar  nature,  namely  the  body  of  tlie  Lord,  as  we  are  taught  in 
eh.  11:  29. 

IX.  Subject  continued. — We  shall  now  proceed  to  show  by  ex- 
amples from  the  New  Testament,  that  the  figure  of  speech  which, 
on  the  authority  of  Paul  we  have  assumed  in  the  words  of  the  in- 
stitution, is  an  authorized  one  ;  namely,  "  This  wine  is  my  blood,'^ 
instead  of  ''  this  wine  gives  you  my  blood" — "  Tliis  bread  is  my 
body,"  instead  of  "  this  bread  gives  you  my  body."  A  trope  per- 
fectly sin)ilar  is  found  in  1  Pet.  3:  21,  awsidriaewg  ayw&rjg  inegoi- 
tn^u  (baptism  is)  the  witness  of  a  good  conscience  etc.  "  baptism 
gives  [procures  for]  us  confidence  to  address  ourselves  to  God." — 
Comp.  *§v  43.  111.  4.  The  second  example  wdiich  we  adduce,  is  Rom. 
7:  13,  TO  ovtf  dyadov  Ifiol  ytyove  Oavaiog;  did  that  which  is  good 
become  death  unto  me  ?  "  was  tlierefore  the  law  which  is  good  (v. 
10,  12,)  productive  of  misfortune  to  me?"  or  *'did  it  produce  mis- 
fortune to  me  :"  The  third  is  1  Cor.  1 1 :  29,  y>plf.{u  iauKo  tadUv 
xat  nii/et  he  eateth  and  drinketh  judgment  to  himself,  *'  he  eateth 
and  drinketh  that  which  will  produce  punishment  unto  him."  The 
fourth  is  John  11:  25,  and  Col.  3:  4,  iqu  t]  avaGiaGig  xul  r]  ^(ai] 
I  am  the  resurrection  and  the  life,  ''  I  give  (am  the  author  of)  the 
resurrection  and  the  life."  The  fifth,  Rom.  10:  4,  XQiaiog  ztkog 
vofiov  ioTi  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law,  "  Christ  makes  an  end  to 
the  law  ;"  that  is,  he  has  put  a  lawful  end  to  the  applicability  of 
the  law  (by  which  perfect  obedience  was  indispensable  to  happiness) 
to  the  human  family.^ 

X.  1  Cor.  11:  23,  fV  ttJ  vvnil  fj  Tragedidozo  in  the  night  in  which 
he  was  betrayed.  Luke  22:  15 — JS. 

XI.  The  body  and  blood,  spoken  of  by  our  Lord,  were  those 

1  On  the  subject  of  the  usage  by  which  the  noun  is  put  in  the  accusative 
absolute  (as  in  Hebrew  when  ns  precedes  the  noun)  see  Observv.  p.  295,  297. 
Pissert.  in  Epp.  ad  Corinth.  Note  1(53. 

5  On  the  Design  of  the  Atonementj  p.  677. 


<§>   114.]  THE  lord's  SUPPER.  541 

which  were  shortly  to  be  broken  and  shed.  This  is  evident  from 
the  expressions  iaxwofievov,  didofievov  {ick(o(4ivov.)  1  Cor.  11:  24. 
compare  nagroi/  2  Cor.  13:  2. 

PauUis  in  his  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament,  has  advanced 
the  hypothesis,  that  the  words  "  given  for  you,"  Luke  22:  19,  and 
"  broken  for  you,"  1  Cor.  11:  24,  were  not  spoken  by  Jesus,  but 
were  a  part  of  the  ritual  of  Christians,  and  signify  "  This,  fellow- 
communicants,  which  is  now  broken  for  you — given  for  your  use." 
Tliis  conjecture  is  refuted  in  the  Allgem.  Litter.  Zeitung  for  1802, 
p.  410  etc.  As  Jesus  did,  according  to  all  three  of  the  Evangelists, 
say,  when  mentioning  his  blood  :  which  was  shed  for  many  ;"  is  it 
not  probable  that  he  also  uttered  those  words  mentioned  by  Luke 
concerning  the  bread,  though  Matthew  and  Mark  have  not  men- 
tioned them  ?  They  indeed  seem  to  be  essentially  necessary  to  the 
design  of  Jesus,  which  was,  to  call  their  attention  to  the  circum- 
stance that  he  was  about  to  give  his  body  and  blood  a  sacrifice  for 
the  welfare  of  mankind." 

Xn.  The  expression  "  flesh  [body]  and  blood  of  Christ"  ad()^ 
[to  Goj^ia]  xal  i6  aif^a  X^toiov,  is  used  in  this  passage,  as  in  John 
6:  53 — 56,  by  synecdoche,  to  express  Christ  himself;  for  those  ex- 
))ressions  are  interchanged  with  eyta  ''  J,"  in  v.  57,  35,  41,  48,  51. 
They  signify  that  Christ  is  a  real  man,  and  laid  down  his  life  for 
men^  v.  62,  53,  42,  51.  In  other  instances  also,  the  entire  man 
Christ  is  expressed  by  the  phrases  "  Flesh,"  or  "  body,"  "  blood," 
"flesh  and  blood"  [aa^|,  OMfia,^  alfAu,  adg^  aat  aT^icc,^]  John  1:  14, 
he,  the  Word  or  Logos,  became  flesh,  i.  e.  became  man.  More- 
over, the  body  of  Jesus  is  not  severed  from  the  rest  of  himself ;  and 
therefore  he  cannot  be  given  us  in  a  separated  state.  But  the  man 
Jesus  himself  who  died  for  us,  is  present  at  the  celebration  of  the 
Holy  Supper,  in  that  manner  in  which  he  now  exists,  that  is,  in  a 
glorified  state.4  Hence  Paul  uses  the  phrases  "  body"  and  "  body 
and  blood"  of  Christ  as  synonymous,  in  1  Cor.  11:27,29;  for 
both,  by  synecdoche,  signify  the  man  Jesus  himself,  who  is  the 
Lord  (15:  47.)  And  the  object  of  his  being  thus  designated  by  his 
body  and  blood,  is  to  remind  us,  that  it  is  the  same  Jesus  who  once 
died   for  us,  thoucrh   now  he  is  Lord  over  all,  and  of  whom  it  may 


1  See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  the  Gospel  of  John,  p.  103  etc. 

2  Gataker  de   novi  instr.  stylo,  c.  X.  p.  103-105,  and  Schleusner's  Lex.  art. 
oir/xa  no.  5. 

3  See  Kypke  on  Matt.  27:  4.  Tom.  I.  obss.  SS.  p.  135,  and   Schlcusner's  Lex. 
voc.  uffia  no.  6.  Tom.  I.  p.  50.  ^ 
-^4  Libr.  Symbol,    p.  158,    -  Loqnimur  de    praesenliA   vivi  Christi."    Sellers 
Tlieol.  Dogm.  polem.  p.  044,630. 


542  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

therefore  with  truth  be  said,  that  he  gave  his  body  a  sacrifice,  and 
shed  his  blood.^ 

XIII.  Christ  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  a  mere  man,  from  whom 
nothing  could  be  expected  which  transcends  the  powers  of  human 
nature.  John  6:  42.  We  must  remember  that  the  person  who 
makes  these  promises,  is  in  the  most  perfect  union  with  the  divine 
nature,  which  existed  long  before  the  time  of  the  incarnation  (v. 
62,)  and  is  therefore  possessed  of  advantages  and  perfections  of 
such  a  nature  as  cannot  be  measured  by  the  contracted  standard  of 
human  power.^  This  is  especially  the  case  in  the  present  state  of 
Jesus,  in  which  he  has  the  full  enjoyment  of  his  divine  greatness 
and  power.  That  divine  Logos,  or  Word,  who  is  omnipresent,  who 
became  man  (John  1:  14,)  and  whose  human  nature  puts  him  into 
a  peculiar  union  with  us  (Eph.  5:  29 — 32,)  is  present  at  the  eu- 
charist,  and  exerts  his  influence  in  an  incomprehensible  manner.^ 
But  although  it  is  impossible  for  the  finite  mind  of  man  to  compre- 
hend the  mode  of  the  omnipresence  of  God,  in  general,  and  conse- 
quently also  the  mode  of  his  presence  in  the  eucharist ;  we  never- 
theless believe  the  doctrine  on  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God  (John  6:  68.)  I  do  indeed  willingly  admit,  that  the 
6th  chapter  of  John  does  not  treat  of  the  Lord's  supper;  but  we 
may  at  least  learn  from  that  chapter,  that,  in  consequence  of  his 
peculiar  union  with  the  Deity,  Jesus  is  the  food  of  the  soul  to  those 
who  put  their  trust  in  him  (see  v.  35  48 — 1 1.  53 — 56,  58  ;)  that 
is,  that  in  consequence  of  a  peculiar  union  (v.  56,)  he  becomes  ours, 
becomes  as  it  were  our  meat  and  drink,  and  promotes  our  spiritual 
life  and  welfare,  and  that  by  virtue  of  this  union  with  Christ,  we 
may  expect  that  our  bodies  will  after  death  enter  on  a  new  and 
blessed  existence.^  He  who  puts  his  trust  in  Christ,  derives  nourish- 
ment from  him,  but  this  nourishment  does  not  consist  merely  in 
faith,  or  reliance  on  him,  as  Calvin  himself  declared.^  Just  as  is 
the  case  of  bodily  eating,  the  nourishment  derived  from  the  food 
does  not  result  merely  from  the  act  of  eating,  but  also  depends  on 
the  presence  and  quality  of  the  substance  eaten ;  thus  also  the 
nourishment  received  in  the  Holy  supper  by  the  worthy  communi- 

'  "  Flesh  and  blood"  signify  a  mortal  body.  Heb.  2:  14.  1  Cor.  15:  50.  53,  42. 
This  signification  of  the  words  od^^  xatat/ua  is  admitted  in  Eichhorn's  Biblioth. 
Vol.  6,  p.  759 — 772  ;  in  which  Dissertation,  however,  the  words  of  the  institution 
themselves  are  explained  in  a  very  different  way. 

8  On  the  Design  of  John's  Gospel,  p.  194.  and  Calvin's  Institutiones  Christ, 
rel.  L.  IV.  c.  17.  §  7—10. 

3  See  Libr.  symbol,  p.  753.  Seiler  sup.  cit.  p.  641.  Startorii  Compend.  Theol. 
Dogm.  §651.  Reinhard,p.  599. 

4  John  6:  54.  Rom.  8:  10.  1  Cor.  6:  13—17.  15:  47—49.  §  65. 
3  Institut.  Christ.  relig.Lib.  IV.  c.  18.  §  5. 


§  1 14.]  THE  lord's  supper.  543 


cant,  does  not  depend  merely  on  the  act  of  believing,  but  also  on 
the  presence  and  influence  of  Christ,  with  whom  we  become  united 
through  the  instrumentality  of  faith,  and  who  thereby  becomes  ours 
(v.  56.)  Faith  is  merely  the  instrument  by  which  this  union  of  the 
believer  with  Christ  is  effected,  Eph.  3:  17,  that  Christ  may  dwell 
in  your  hearts  by  faith.  Nor  does  this  spiritual  food  consist  merely 
in  the  recollection  of  that  favour  which  Christ  has  long  since  shown 
us  by  his  death.  For,  although  the  glorified  state  of  Jesus  could 
have  had  no  beneficial  influence  on  us,  and  could  not  have  tended 
to  nourish  our  souls,  i.  e.  to  promote  our  spiritual  welfare,  if  he  who 
had  come  from  heaven,  and  who,  after  he  had  assumed  human  na- 
ture, returned  to  heaven  as  man  (v.  6'2,)  had  not  previously  laid 
down  his  life ;  still  his  death  is  not  the  only  blessing  which  he  in- 
tended to  bestow  on  us.  But  the  exalted^  Redeemer,  desires  to 
bestow  on  us  a  new  and  permanent  blessing  by  taking  us  into  an 
intimate  union^  with  himself,  and  by  being  present  with  us^  (Eph. 
5:  32)  in  an  incomprehensible  manner,  and  thus  exerting  a  bene- 
ficial influence  on  us,  and  by  this  union,  qualifying  us  for  the  benefits 
of  his  death."^  Had  the  idea  which  Jesus  intended  to  convey  in 
John  6,  been  merely  this,  that  those  are  blessed  (C(^iii/  t'letv  v.  53, 
58)  who  accept  the  blessings  v^•hich  he  purchased  by  his  death  and 
make  a  proper  improvement  of  them  ;  he  might  have  taught  them 
this^  without  giving  such  decided  offence,  as  it  is  evident  he  did, 
from  the  fact,  that  many  of  his  disciples,  in  consequence  of  it,  even 
abandoned  his  cause  and  left  him  v.  52,  60,  tailv  atXrjgog  oviog 
loyog  this  is  a  hard  saying.  Moreover,  had  he  meant  no  more  than 
this,  he  would  certainly  have  rectified  their  misapprehension  of  his 
meaning  by  an  explanation.  But  we  find  on  the  other  hand,  that 
he  always  repeats  the  very  same  w^ords  (v.  53 — 58,)  and  every 
thing  which  he  says  by  way  of  explanation,  goes  to  confirm  the 
proposition,  that  he  who  is  truly  man,  who  was  sent  into  this  world, 
and  who  would  suffer  death  for  all  its  inhabitants  (v.  51,)  actually 
was  the  food  of  the  souls  of  all  those  (or  according  to  another  read- 
ing, the  actual  food,  dXfj&oJg  or  dXt}{^iig  ^gmoig  y]  adgl  uoy  tan  v. 
55.)  who  are  desirous  of  obtaining  salvation  procured  by  his  death; 
or  that  they  must  be  received  into  a   peculiar  union  with  him  (v. 

1  John  6:  62.  Matt.  28:  18.  Eph.  5:  23.  1:  22. 

2  John  6:56,  He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood,  remaineth  in 
me  and  I  in  him.  Eph.  5:  30-33.  1  Cor.  6: 15,  your  bodies  are  the  members  of 
Christ.  V.  ]7,  he  that  is  joined  unto  the  Lord,  is  one  spirit. 

3  Matt.  28:  20,  I  am  with  you.  Eph. 5:  29,  the  Lord  nourisheth  and  cherisheth 
the  church. 

4  Phil.  3:  8.  Rom.  8:  1,9.  Calvin's  Instit.  sup.  cit.  §  11.  p.  491. 

5  Nay,  this  he  actually  did  teach  without  giving  so  much  offence.  John  10: 
11— 18.  comp.  6:60— 66. 


544  OF  THE   SACRAMENTS.  [bK.   IV. 

56,)  and  that  on  this  union,  and  the  union  of  himself  (the  man  Je- 
sus) with  God,  depended  their  spiritual  life  and  salvation.  It  was 
necessary  for  Christ  to  be  a  man,  odg'^,  and  a  man  most  closely- 
united  to  God  (v.  63,)  in  order  that  he  might  be  enabled  to  die  for 
the  human  family  (roi;  x6(J;moi' v.  51.^  82.)  But  in  order  that 
each  individual  may  actually  enjoy  the  salvation  purchased  by  his 
death,  it  is  necessary  that  Jesus  who  died  for  us,  and  who  now  lives 
in  the  full  enjoyment  of  his  union  with  God  (v.  63,  57,)  should  be 
united  with  us  (v.  50,  53 — 58,)  and  exert  his  divine  power  in  the 
exercise  of  that  right  to  bestow  salvation  {§  87  ;)  in  order  to  effect 
and  consummate  the  salvation  of  those  sinners  who  put  their  trust 
in  him  (v.  47.)  The  agency  of  Christ  in  the  salvation  of  his  peo- 
ple, will  not  indeed  be  visible  in  its  highest  degree  (§  65)  until  the 
end  of  the  world  (^hiuiri  rifxiQa  v.  54.)  But  he  is  now  also  en- 
gaged in  promoting  the  salvation  of  his  people,  in  a  manner  suited 
to  their  situation  (v.  56.)  Now,  if  the  man  Jesus,  who  is  the  Son 
of  God  is  in  general  present  with  his  people  and  exerts  his  agency 
for  their  good  ;  if  true  Christians  are  united  to  him  and  through 
him^  to  the  Father'^  and  Holy  Spirit '?  surely  it  is  not  unreasonable 
to  believe  that  he  will,  according  to  his  promise,  be  present  at  the 
celebration  of  the  Holy  Supper  also,  and  exert  his  salutary  influence 
on  those  who  partake  of  that  ordinance  with  upright  intentions.^ — 
But  the  Holy  Supper  is  distinguished  by  the  peculiar  circumstance, 
that  in  it  the  presence  of  Christ  is  displayed  by  a  visible  pledge, 
with  which  pledge  he  has  placed  his  presence  in  such  intimate  con- 
nexion, that  we  may  believe  its  truth,  as  assuredly  as  we  believe 
the  testimony  of  our  senses  that  bread  and  w^ine  are  before  us. — 
And  the  confidence  of  the  believer  in  the  general  presence  and 
protection  of  Jesus  must  certainly  be  confirmed  in  a  high  degree  by 
the  idea,  that  on  this  particular  occasion  he  is  present  at  a  specific 
time  and  at  a  particular  place,  and  evinces  his  presence  and  agency 
by  a  visible  pledge  and  symbol.^ 

XIV.  The  guilt  of  irreverent  communicants  is  aggravated  by  the 
circumstance  of  the  presence  of  Jesus.  1  Cor.  1 1:  27 — 29*  It  could 
not  be  said  of  the  unworthy  communicants,  that  they  are  "  guilty 


.    1  John  17:  23.  14:  !).  16:  13—15.  Gal.  4:  G.  §  44,  45. 

2  John  14:  23,  I  and  my  Father  will  make  our  abode  with  him.  In  the  Dis- 
sert, de  efficientia  spir.  sancti  in  mentibus  nostris,  it  is  proved  from  the  context 
V.  16 — 22  that  those  words  refer  to  a  union  between  the  believer  and  Christ  and 
the  Father  in  this  life. 

3  Rom.  8:  9  etc.  the  phrase  "  the  Spirit  of  God  dwelleth  in  you"  is  synony- 
mous with  "to  have  the  spirit  of  Christ,"  and  with  the  phrase  "  Christ  is  in  you." 

4  Comp.  Sailer,  p.  650.  Sartorious,  §  557.  p.  441. 

5  See  Crusius'  Plan  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  p.  160,  171—173.  Goetz  on  Matt. 
26:  26,  in  his  Commentary,  p.  493. 


^  114.]  THE  lord's  supper.  545 

of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,"  ivoxol  rov  Gcufiatog  xa*  trjg 
aificcTog  Tov  ^vglov,^  if  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  were  not  pres- 
ent ;  if,  in  addition  to  the  bread  and  wine  which  are  received  in  an 
irreverent  manner,  the  Lord  himself  were  not  present,  and  willing 
to  form  or  cherish  a  most  salutary  union  with  the  guests. 

XV.  The  presence  of  Jesus  at  the  Holy  Supper,  has  the  hap- 
piest influence  on  the  worthy  communicants.  John  6:  53,  56 — 58. 
48--51,  35,  63.  Comp.  111.  13. 


Appendix  on  the  Mode  of  the  Saviour's  presence  in  the 
Eucharist,  by  the  Translator.^ 

The  mode  of  the  Saviour^ s  presence  in  the  Eucharist, 

Although  this  ordinance  was  designed  as  a  memorial  of  the  dy- 
ing love  of  the  Redeemer,  it  has  unhappily  been  the  occasion  of 
much  controversy  in  the  christian  church.  The  strongly  figurative 
language  of  the  Saviour,  together  with  the  careful  repetition  of  the 
precise  words  by  the  apostle  Paul  and  the  explanation  annexed  by 
him,  was  variously  interpreted  even  in  the  earlier  centuries  of  the 
christian  history,  and  a  kind  of  mysterious  influence  ascribed  to 
this  ordinance.  In  the  middle  ages  of  ignorance  and  superstition, 
views  of  the  grossest  kind  obtained  currency ;  until,  in  the  year 
1215,  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  was  formally  adopted  as 
the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  by  a  Lateran  Council, 
under  pope  Innocent  III. 

According  to  this  doctrine,  the  outward  emblems,  though  they 
retain  their  external  form,  are  no  longer  bread  and  wine  ;  but  *'  the 
consecration  of  the  bread  and  wine  produces  a  change  of  the  whole 
substance  of  the  bread,  into  the  substance  of  the  body  of  Christ  our 
Lord,  and  of  the  whole  substance  of  the  ivine,  into  the  substance 
of  his  blood'y^  This  monstrous  error,  Luther  and  his  coadjutors 
rejected  for  the  following  reasons,  viz.  a)  It  is  contradicted  by  the 
clear  and  indisputable  testimony  of  our  senses,  which  demonstrate 
to  us  that  no  change  has  occured  in  the  nature  and  properties  of  the 

i  "Evsxa  must  be  supplied,  as  in  James  2:  10.  Comp.  Diss,  in  Epist.  Jacobi, 
Note  64. 

9  See  the  Translator's  Elements  of  Popular  Theology,  pp.  245—255.  2d  edit. 

3Sanctahaec  Synodus  declarat,  per  consecrationen  panis  et  vini,conver8io- 
nem  fieri  totius  substantise  panis,  in  substatiam  corporis.  Christi,  Domini  nostn, 
et  totius  substantise  in  vini  substantiam  sanguinis  ejus—quffi  conversio  conven- 
ienter  et  proprie  Transuhstantiato  est  appellata.  Concil  Trident,  bess.  \6.  cap.  4. 

69 


546  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

bread  and  wine.  We  have  this  testiniony  not  of  one  sense  only, 
but  of  sight,  taste,  smell,  and  touch  :  nor  of  the  senses  of  one  in- 
dividual only  ;  but  of  all  men  of  every  generation  and  country. 
But  no  testimony  is  so  strong  as  that  of  the  senses  ;  because  on  it 
rests  even  our  belief  of  the  scriptures.^  b)  This  doctrine  contradicts 
the  universal  observation  of  mankind,  that  all  bodies  (material  sub- 
stances) must  occupy  definite  portions  of  space,  and  cannot  be  at 
more  than  one  place  at  the  same  time :  for  according  to  this  tenet, 
every  portion  of  consecrated  bread  is  really  the  whole  material  body 
of  the  Saviour ;  hence  the  whole  body  is  locally  present  in  many 
different  places  at  the  same  time,  which  is  absurd,  c)  The  apostle 
still  calls  the  symbols  bread  and  wine  after  their  consecration,  which 
he  would  not  have  done,  if  they  had  been  transmuted  into  the  body 
and  blood  of  the  Saviour.'-^  d)  Because  the  consecrated  bread  and 
wine  are  subject  to  the  same  laws  of  decomposition  and  corruption, 
as  if  they  were  not  consecrated.^  e)  Because  it  is  a  comparatively 
recent  doctrine,  unknown  in  the  christian  church  in  general,  until 
about  a  thousand  years  after  this  sacrament  was  instituted. 

But  whilst  the  Reformers  agreed  in  rejecting  this  papal  error,  it 
is  much  to  be  regretted,  that  they  could  neither  harmonize  among 
themselves  what  should  be  substituted  in  its  stead,. nor  consent  to 
walk  together  in  love,  when  they  could  not  entirely  accord  in  opin- 
ion. It  was  on  the  subject  of  this  doctrine,  that  the  first  important 
diversity  existed  among  them  ;  a  diversity  subsequently  increased 
by  the  peculiar  views  of  Calvin  relative  to  the  divine  decrees. — 
Alas  !  that  men,  distinguished  so  highly  for  intellect,  and  chosen  of 
God  to  accomplish  so  great  a  work,  should  betray  such  a  glaring 
want  of  liberality  toward  each  other ;  that  having  gloriously  coope- 
rated in  vanquishing  the  papal  beast,  they  should  turn  their  weapons 
against  each  other,  for  a  point  not  decided  in  scripture,  and  there- 
fore of  minor  importance  !  Yet,  when  we  recollect  that  this  inflex- 
ible, uncompromising  spirit  was  an  essential  qualification  for  the 
successful  conflict  against  the  papal  hierarchy,  for  which  they  were 
designed  by  Providence,  we  shall  feel  constrained  to  regard  it  rather 
as  an  unavoidable  evil  of  the  age  than  a  blemish  in  the  character  of 
the  blessed  reformers. 


J  1  John  1:  3.  That  which  we  have  seen  and  heard,  declare  we  unto  you. — 
John  3:  11.  Luke  24:  29:  Behold  my  hands  and  my  feet ;  handle  me  and  see  that 
it  is  I. 

2  1  Cor.  10:  IC.  11:26. 

3  The  following  lines  of  Cicero,  are  so  applicable  to  the  doctrine  of  transub- 
stantiation,  that  if  they  had  been  written  for  the  purpose,  they  could  not  have 
been  made  more  appropriate.  "  Dum  fruges  Cererem,  vinum  Liberum  dicimus, 
genere  nos  quidem  sermonis  utimur  usitato,  sed  ecquen  tam  amentem  esse  putas, 
qui  illud  quo  vescatur  Deum  credat  esse  ?"  Nor  would  the  charge  be  entirely 
inapplicable  to  the  language  occasionally  used  by  some  early  Lutheran  divines. 


^114.]  THE  lord's  SUPPER.  547 

The  views  adopted  by  the  different  reformers  and  principal  di- 
vines of  the  Protestant  churches,  though  numerous  and  diversified  in 
their  modes  of  explanation,  may  be  reduced  generically  to  four. 

The  first  was  that  adopted  by  Luther  and  the  major  part  of  the 
Lutheran  church  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  and  earher  part 
of  the  eighteenth  centuries,  as  also  by  the  Moravian  church  until 
the  present  day.  The  advocates  of  this  opinion  premised  the  fol- 
lowing points  ; 

a)  that  agreeably  to  the  declarations  of  the  apostle  Paul,i  all  hu- 
man bodies  will  experience  a  very  great  change  at  death,  and  prior 
to  the  resurrection  in  their  glorified  form.  The  extent  of  this  change 
they  regarded  as  such,  that  although  enough  of  the  old  body  would 
remain  to  serve  as  the  basis  of  its  identity  (its  substance,  or  essence  ;) 
its  properties  would  be  entirely  changed,  and  it  would  no  longer  be 
subject  to  the  laws  and  limitations  which  now  regulate  matter.  In 
this  sense  they  understood  the  declaration  of  the  apostle,  that  the 
glorified  body  shall  be  incorruptible  and  immortal,  yea,  so  highly 
refined  and  elevated  in  its  properties  that  it  may  be  said  to  partake 
of  the  properties  of  a  spirit,  may  justly  be  called  "  a  spiritual 
body."  Now,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  body  of  the  Saviour  has 
also  experienced  the  change  described  by  Paul :  and  it  is  therefore, 
no  longer  subject  to  those  laws,  nor  possessed  of  those  properties 
(visibility,  tangibility,  etc.)  which  belonged  to  it  in  the  present  world. 

b)  It  was,  moreover,  believed,  that  in  consequence  of  its  union 
with  the  divine  nature,  the  glorified  body  of  Christ  had  been  en- 
dowed with  properties  still  higher  than  those  which  the  glorified 
bodies  of  the  saints  will  possess :  and  that  it  was  therefore  even  less 
restricted  by  those  laws  which  now  regulate  the  matter  known  to  us. 

With  these  premises,  their  view  of  this  subject  may  be  advanta- 
geously stated  thus : 

L  The  bread  and  wine  remain  in  all  respects  unchanged ;  but 
the  invisible,  glorified  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  also  actually 
present  at  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist,  and  exert  an  influence 
on  all  those  who  receive  the  bread  and  wine  ;  not  indeed  present  in 
that  form  nor  ivith  those  properties  which  belonged  to  the  Saviour's 
body  on  earth,  such  as  visibility,  tangibility,  etc.  for  these  it  no 
longer  possesses,  but  present  ivith  the  7iew  and  elevated  properties 
which  now  belong  to  its  glorified  state. 

There  seems  to  have  been  a  peculiar  fondness  among  the  advo- 
cates of  this  view,  to  use  the  figurative  language  of  the  Saviour  and 


There  are  also  celestial  bodies  and  oo^'es_terjestrjal^,^but  J^he 

il  is  one  and  the  glory  of  th« 

Ts  a  natural  body  and  there  is  a  spiritual  body. 

sed  incorruptible,  and  we  shall  be  changed  ;  for  this  corruptible  must  put  on  in 

corruption,  and  this  mortal  must  put  on  immortality 


1  1  Cor.  15:  40.  There  are  also  celestial  bodies  and  oodiesterresina.,  uui  t..o 
glory  of  the  celestial  is  one  and  the  glory  of  the  terrestrial  is  another,  v.  44  1  here 
is  a  natural  bod v  and  there  is  a  spiritual  body.     v.  52.  53.  The  dead  sl'all  be  rai- 


548  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

speak  of  eating  his  body  and  drinking  his  blood  ;  but  they  denied 
that  they  understood  these  terms  literally,  and  rejected  the  idea 
of  a  carnal,  material  reception.  Their  idea  seems  to  have  generally 
been,  that  we  thereby  come  into  communion  with,  and  under  the 
influence  of  the  glorified  Saviour. 

Speaking  of  this  view  the  celebrated  Lutheran  divine  Dr.  Mo- 
sheim  says  :^  "What  the  nature  of  this  presence  is,  we  know  not. — 
The  thing  itself  we  know ;  but  the  mode  of  its  truth  is  a  mystery 
which  we  cannot  comprehend.  We  deny  that  Christ  is  present 
and  received  in  a  physical  or  material  manner.  But  should  any  one 
ask,  How  is  he  present  ?  our  answer  is,  We  know  not.  We  com- 
monly call  his  presence  in  this  holy  ordinance,  a  '  sacramental 
presence.'  This  might  seem  to  be  an  attempt  to  define  the  mode 
of  his  presence  ;  but  by  this  word  v/e  mean  nothing  more  than  that 
we  are  ignorant  of  the  mode.  It  has  been  said,  we  receive  Jesus 
in,  under,  or  with  the  bread  (in,  cum,  sub  pane.)  These  three 
words  might  signify  three  modes  ;  but  they  are  designed  to  indicate, 
that  we  do  not  wish  to  determine  any  thing  about  the  mode  of 
Christ's  presence.  Those  therefore  err,  who  say,  that  we  believe 
in  impanation,  or  that  Christ  is  in  the  bread  and  wine.  Nor  are 
those  more  correct  who  charge  us  with  believing  subpanation,  that 
is,  that  Christ  is  under  the  form  of  bread  and  wine.  And  equally 
groundless  is  the  charge  of  consubstantiation,  or  the  belief  that  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  changed  into  one  substance  with  the 
bread  and  wine. 

To  all  the  objections,  derived  from  the  testimony  of  our  senses, 
the  advocates  of  this  view  reply,  that  they  are  based  on  the  proper- 
ties which  belong  to  human  bodies  in  this  life,  and  therefore  are  not 
applicable  to  the  glorified  body  of  Christ,  which  does  not  possess 
these  properties. 

To  the  objection  that  this  system  is  exposed  to  the  same  difficul- 
ties as  transubstantiation,  it  is  responded  that  the  cases  are  different. 
In  the  Roman  Catholic  error,  which  the  reformers  rejected,  an  ex- 
emption from  the  common  laws  and  properties  of  matter,  is  attribu- 
ted to  bread  and  wine,  material  substances  confessedly  belonging  to 
this  world,  and  subject  to  the  laws  of  matter  ;  but  the  Lutheran 
doctrine  ascribes  such  exemption  to  a  substance  belonging  to  anoth- 
er world,  concerning  which  all  admit  and  the  scriptures  expressly 
declare,  that  it  does  differ  very  much  from  ordinary  matter. 

II.  The  second  view  of  this  doctrine  is  that,  which  was  early 
entertained  by  some  Lutheran  divines,  and,  in  the  last  century  be- 
came generally  current. 

That  the  bread  and  wine  remain  in  all  respects  unchanged;  thai  the 

I  Elementa  Theol.  Dogm.  Vol.  II.  p.  328,  329^- 


§  114.]  THE  lord's  supper.  549 

'  glorified  human  nature  of  Christ  is  not  s\ihstantialhj  {essentially) 
present  at  all,  hut  only  influentially,  efficaciously  or  virtually  ;  that 
is,  by  a  special  supernatural  influence  exerted  on  all  communicants j 
at  the  time  when  they  receive  the  bread  and  ivine. 

This  was  probably  the  opinion  of  that  distinguished  ornament  of 
the  Lutheran  church,  Melancthon,  who  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the 
substantial  presence  of  the  glorified  hurnjin  nature,  and  wisely- 
maintained,  that  as  the  scriptures  had  not  specified  the  mode  of  the 
Saviour's  presence,  every  individual  should  be  left  to  the  free  exer- 
cise of  his  own  judgment.  Many  of  the  most  judicious  divines 
adopted  the  views  of  JVIelancthon,  although  he  and  they  were  treat- 
ed with  much  intolerance  by  the  other  party.  The  Formula 
Concordiae,  which  was  published  in  1577,  expressly  to  counteract 
this  opinion,  strange  as  it  appears,  seems  itself,  in  some  places  to 
inculcate  it,  and  is  thus  inconsistent  with  itself,  as  will  be  seen  from 
the  following  extract :  "  And  by  that  word  (spiritually)  we  exclude 
those  Capernaitish  notions,  concerning  a  gross  and  carnal  presence 
which  have  been  attributed  to  our  churches  by  the  sacramentarians, 
in  defiance  of  all  our  public  protestations  against  them.  And  when 
we  use  this  term  (spiritually,)  we  wish  to  be  understood  as  signify- 
ing, that  the  body  and  blood  are  received,  and  eaten,  and  drank 
spiritually  in  the  holy  supper.  For  although  the  participation  is 
eft'ected  by  the  mouth,  the  manner  in  which  it  is  done  is  spiritual"^ 
Yet  in  other  parts  of  the  work  its  authors  even  go  beyond  Luther 
himself. 

When  they  say,  this  spiritual  participation  is  effected  by  the 
mouth,  the  only  intelligent  idea  deducible  from  their  language  is, 
that  this  influence,  which  Christ  exerts  on  us  through  his  body  and 
blood,  is  made  dependent  on  the  oral  reception  of  the  external  em- 
blems, bread  and  wine. 

The  habit  which  prevailed  of  using  the  strongly  figurative  lan- 
guage of  the  Saviour  even  beyond  the  extent  of  his  example,  often 
involves  the  earlier  advocates  of  this  second  opinion  in  inconsistency  ; 
yet  there  was  always  a  strong  party  in  the  church  who  favoured 
Melancthon's  views,  nor  was  the  power  of  the  princes  nor  the  influ- 
ence of  symbolic  restrictions  sufficient  to  repress  them. 

Among  the  later  divines  who  have  asserted  the  merely  virtual  or 
influential  presence  of  the  Saviour  in  the  eucharist,  may  be  ranked 
Reinhard,  Zachariae,  Storr,  Flatt,  Marheinecke,  etc. 

I  F^nnul.  Concord.  Art.  VII.  No.  XXI.  p.  604.  "  Et  quidem  per  vocabulum 
illud  (spiritualiter)  Capernaiticas  illas  imaginaliones  de  crassa  et  carnali  presen- 
tia  excludimus  et  rejicimus  :  quse  ecclesiis  per  sacramentarios,  post  tot  publicas 
nostras  protestationas,  affingitur.  Et  in  ea  sententia  intelligi  volumus  vocabu- 
lum (spiritualiter)  cum  dicimus,  corpus  et  sanguinem  Chnsti  in  sacra  ccena 
spiritualiter  accipi,  edi  et  bibi.  Tametsienim  participatio  ilia  ore  fiat  jtamen 
modus  spiritualis  est." 


550  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

Of  this  opinion  also  was  the  distinguished  reformer,  Calvin,  whose 
sentiments  are  in  this  country  often  misapprehended,  but  who  cer- 
tainly used  language  fully  as  strong  as  that  above  cited  from  the 
Lutheran  Symbol.  "  I  therefore  maintain  (says  Calvin)  that  in  the 
mijstery  of  the  supper,  by  the  emblems  bread  and  wine,  Christ  is 
really  exhibited  to  us,  that  is,  his  body  and  blood,  in  which  he  yield- 
ed full  obedience  in  order  to  work  out  a  righteousness  for  us  :  by 
which,  in  the  first  place,  we  may  as  it  were  become  united  with  him 
into  one  body,  and  secondly,  being  made  partakers  of  the  substance 
of  himself,  also  be  strengthened  by  the  reception  of  every  blessing. "i 
The  entire  opinion  of  Calvin  is  thus  stated  by  a  very  distinguished 
living  writer  of  Germany  •?  "  Calvin's  spiritual  reception  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  is  indeed  a  real  but  not  an  oral  one,  and 
consists  in  this,  that  in  the  moment  in  which  we  partake  of  the 
bread  and  wine,  if  our  hearts  are  by  faith  elevated  to  him,  a  super- 
natural influence  emanates  from  the  substance  of  the  glorified  body 
of  Christ  (that  is  and  remains  in  heaven)  by  which  the  soul  of  the 
believer  is  animated  and  strengthened  in  a  mysterious  manner.  But 
the  unbeliever  receives  nothing  more  than  bread  and  wine."  The 
only  difference  between  the  above  extracts  from  Calvin  and  the 
views  of  some  Lutherans  is,  that  the  former  confines  this  supernat- 
ural influence  to  believers,  whilst  the  latter  extends  it  to  all  who 
partake  of  the  consecrated  elements. 

III.  The  third  opinion  is,  that  there  is  no  presence  of  the  glori- 
fied HUMAN  nature  of  the  Saviour,  either  substantial  or  influential, 
nor  any  thing  mysterious  or  supernatural  in  the  eucharist ;  yet  that 
whilst  the  bread  and  luine  are  merely  symbolic  representations  of 
the  Saviour's  absent  body  by  which  we  are  reminded  of  his  suffer- 
ings, there  is  also  a  peculiar  and  special,  spiritual  blessing  bes- 
towed by  the  divine  Saviour  on  all  worthy  communicants,  by  which 
their  faith  and  christian  graces  are  confirmed.  This  view  seems 
sometimes  to  have  been  maintained  by  Melancthon  and  by  some  of 
those  Lutheran  divines,  who  were  termed  Sacramentarians  ;  and  is 
received  by  not  a  few  theologians  of  the  Lutheran  church  in  Europe 
and  America  at  the  present  day. 

According  to  this  view,  the  Holy  supper  exerts  its  influence  as  a 
symbolic  representation  of  divine  truth,  on  the  principles  explained 
in  the  discussion  of  the  means  of  grace,  see  Art.  V.  but  its  worthy 

1  Dico  igitur  in  coenae  mysterio  persymbola  panis  et  vini  Christum  vere  nobis 
exhiberi,  adeoque  corpus  et  sanguinem  ejus,  in  quibus  omnern  obedientiarn  pro 
comparanda  nobis  justitia  adimplevit :  quo  scilicet  primum  in  unum  corpus  cum 
ipso  coalescamus  ;  deinde  participes  substantise  ejus  facit,  in  bonorum  omnium 
communicalione  virtutem  quoque  sentiamus.  Institut.  Lib.  IV.  C.  XVII.  II. 

2  Brettschneider's  Systematische  Entwickelung  aller  in  der  Dogmatik 
vorkommender  Begriffe,  p.  721.  edit.  3d,  1826. 


r  1 14.  THE  lord's  supper. 


551 


reception  is  also  the  condition  of  a  special  spiritual  blessing  from 
the  divine  Saviour,  beyond  that  of  the  other  means  ;  a)  Not  only 
because  religious  exercises  of  various  kinds  are  usually  combined  on 
sacramental  occasions,  and  continued  longer  than  at  other  times  • 
but  b)  also  because  of  the  peculiarly  impressive  manner  in  which 
the  solemn  truths  conveyed  by  it  are  presented  to  the  mind  ;  and 
c)  in  consequence  of  the  Saviour's  promise  of  a  peculiar  spiritual 
blessing  on  the  celebration  of  this  ordinance,  which  is  invariably 
conferred  on  all  worthy  communicants.  The  promise  of  this  bles- 
sing they  regard  as  contained  in  the  strongly  figurative  language  of 
the  Saviour,  by  which  he  represents  himself  as  the  spirituat  food  of 
the  soul,  and  also  in  the  declaration  of  Paul,  that  the  cup  and  bread 
are  the  communion,  or  communication,  bestowment,  or  impartation, 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  that  is,  of  the  blessings  purchased 
by  his  atoning  death. 

IV.  The  fourth  opinion  is,  that  there  is  no  presence  of  the  hu- 
man nature  of  the  Saviour  of  any  kind  in  the  holy  supper  ;  nor  any 
peculiar  spiritual  influence  connected  with  this  ordinance  other  than 
that  accompanying  the  truths  which  it  symbolically  represents. 

This  opinion  was  maintained  by  the  distinguished  reformer  Zu- 
inglius,  and  is  generally  received  by  his  followers  in  Europe  and 
America,  and  at  present  also  by  the  great  mass  of  the  Calvinistic 
churches,  which  gradually  abandoned  the  views  of  Calvin  on  this 
subject. 

There  are  but  two  points  of  doctrinal  diversity,  worthy  of  note 
between  the  second  and  third  views  above  detailed,  a)  The  former 
maintains  that  the  influence  exerted  on  communicants  is  a  super- 
natural and  mysterious  one,  whilst  the  latter  ascribes  to  the  eucharist 
itself,  no  other  effect,  than  the  moral  influence  of  the  truths  which 
it  symbolically  represents.  And  b)  the  former  considers  the  special 
influence  of  this  ordinance  as  exerted  by  the  glorified  human  nature 
of  the  Saviour,  whilst  the  latter  regards  the  special  blessing,  atten- 
dant on  the  worthy  participation  of  the  Lord's  supper,  as  a  gracious 
influence  emanating  from  the  divine  being. 

In  regard  to  practical  utility,  there  appears  to  be  little  or  no 
difference  between  them.  If,  as  is  contended,  the  influence  emana- 
ting from  the  Saviour,  is  nothing  material ;  what  can  it  be  but  a 
special  spiritual  blessing  on  the  soul  of  the  communicant  ?  And  it 
may  be  questioned,  whether,  what  is  termed  an  "  influential"  pres- 
ence, can  in  propriety  of  language  be  termed  any  presence  at  all. 

In  point  of  exegetical  evidence,  it  has  been  argued  with  no  small 
degree  of  plausibility,  that  the  opinion  of  a  real,  that  is,  an  actual 
presence,  either  substantial  as  held  by  Luther,  or  influential  as 
maintained  by  Melancthon  and  Calvin,  has  a  decided  advantage 
over  the  other  views. 


552  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.  [bK.  IV. 

After  a  protracted  and  unprofitable  struggle,  the  Lutheran  church 
has  long  since  settled  down  in  the  happy  conviction,  that  on  this,  as 
on  all  other  subjects  not  clearly  determined  by  the  inspired  volume, 
her  sons  shall  be  left  to  follow  the  dictates  of  their  own  consience, 
having  none  to  molest  them  or  make  them  afraid.  In  the  Luther- 
an church  in  this  country,  each  of  the  above  views  has  some  advo- 
cates, though  the  great  body  of  our  divines,  if  we  mistake  not, 
embraces  either  the  second  or  third. 


THE  INFLUENCES  OF  GRACE. 


SECTION    CXV. 


Of  the  true  nature  of  these  influences* 

The  same  Redeemer  who  is  present  at  the  Holy  Supper,  and 
exerts  a  salutary  influence  on  those  who  partake  of  that  ordinance 
with  sincere  and  christian  views,  also  exerts  a  general,  comforting 
and  supporting  influence  on  those  who  make  a  proper  use  of  his 
doctrines.(l)  Some  of  the  passages,(2)  which  refer  to  this  subject, 
might,  indeed,  if  there  were  no  others  of  a  more  explicit  nature,  be 
considered  as  alluding  to  the  influence  of  the  doctrines  themselves, 
and  be  supposed  to  term  the  influence  of  the  doctrines,  "a  divine 
influence,"  because  God  is  the  Author  of  the  doctrines.  But  there 
are  also  numerous  other  passages  in  Scripture,  in  which  the  divine 
influence  is  clearly  distinguished(3)  from  the  doctrines  and  their  in- 
fluence. Some  of  these  passages  are,  moreover,  of  such  a  nature, 
that  they  cannot  well  be  supposed  to  refer  to  any  outward  agency 
of  God,  such  as  a  particular  arrangement  of  the  external  circum- 
stances of  our  situation, (4)  which  might  predispose  our  hearts  to 
receive  the  Word  of  God, (5)  and  to  abide  and  grow  in  the  love  of 
the  truth.,.  But  they  must(6)  necessarily  be  supposed  to  refer  to 
an  internal  influence  of  God  on  the  mind  of  man, (7)  to  an  influence 
which  we  can  neither  explain  nor  comprehend  ;(8)  but  which  we 
must  believe  exclusively(9)  on  the  authority  of  the  Oracles  of  truth. 

Illustrations. 

I.  The  general  comforting  and  supporting  influence  of  the  Re- 
deemer.— 2'Thess.  2:  16,  IT,  now  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself, 
and  God  even  our  Father,  comfort  your  hearts  and  stablish  you  in 

70 


554  INFLUENCES  OF  GRACE.  [bK.  IV. 

every  good  word  and  work.  In  this  passacre  the  influences  of  grace 
are  ascribed  to  Christ,  as  well  as  to  the  Father  (compare  Eph.  1; 
17.  3:  14  etc  ;)  but  in  other  passages  they  are  very  frequently  at- 
tributed to  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  one  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son  <§.  45.  In  Rom.  8:  9.  Gal.  4:  6.  Tit.  3:  6,  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  on  true  Christians  is  represented  as  the  influence  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  and  of  Christ,  and  as  the  gift  of  God,  the  Father  of 
Jesus  Christ.  And  in  Eph.  4:  16,  and  Col.  2:  19,  growth  in  holi- 
ness is  represented  as  an  effect  of  the  agency  of  Christ,'  for  in  both 
these  passages,  iy.  {i'$  ou)  from  signifies  the  efficient  cause. 

II.  The  passages  which  might  be  understood  as  referring  to  the 
effects  of  the  doctrines,  are  such  as  the  following.  Psalm  51:  10 
create  in  rne  a  clean  heart  etc.  Ezek.  36:  26,  27.  1  Pet.  5:  10. 
John  17:  17,  sanctify  them  through  thy  truth.  James  1:  18,  aniKv- 
T,a8v  TifAuQ  Xoyco  uXridiiug  "  He  hath  made  us  new  and  excellent 
creatures  through  the  true  doctrines  (of  the  Gospel."^) 

III.  The  scriptures  clearly  distinguish  between  the  influence  of 
the  doctrines,  and  the  direct  or  immediate  influence  of  God.  1  Cor. 
3:6,7,1  have  planted,  Apollos  watered,  but  God  gave  the  in- 
crease etc.  Here  the  divine  influence  [6  deog  avSavoji'  God  gave 
the  increase]  is  distinguished  from  the  labours  of  the  preachers 
["planting"  and  "watering;"]  and,  consequently,  from  the  doc- 
trines themselves,  and  the  influence  of  God  on  the  preaching*^ 
Phil.  2:  12,  13,  "  Labour  at  the  salvation  of  others  with  modesty 
and  respect  for  them,  <jto'/?w  'Aai.  igofAM , — for  their  salvation  is  not 
the  fruit  ofyour  labour  alone  ;  but  God  must  also  exert  an  influence 
on  them  before  they  are  willing  and  able  to  obey  the  doctrines  of 
the  Gospel  ;  it  is  God  that  workelh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  do 
[accomplish."'*]  In  2  Thess.  2:  15 — 17,  the  agency  of  God  and 
Christ  is  distinguished  from  the  influence  of  the  apostolical  doctrines 
(v.  16,  17.)  Eph.  3:  16,  that  he  (the  Father)  would  grant  unto 
you  according  to  the  riches  of  his  glory,  to  be  strengthened  with 
might  [powerfully  strengthened]  by  his  Spirit  in  the  inner  man. 
Even  if  this  passage  did  not  attribute  the  strengthening  of  the  heart 
to  the  Spirit,  in  an  immediate  manner ;  if  it  described  this  effect 
merely  as  a  mediate  one,  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  word ; 
still  it  would  clearly  inculcate  an  influence  distinct  from  the  word  ; 
for  it  contains  a  prayer  to  God,  that  he  might  cooperate  with  the 
word  (which  was  previously  known,)  and  render  it  effectual  in  con- 
firming the  heart.     But  a  comparison  of  the  20th  verse  with  ch.  1: 

1  See  §  10.  111.  33.  and  Dissert.  I.  in  Kpist.  ad  Coloss. 

2  Dissert  in  Epist.  Jacobi,  Note  28. 

3  Dissertation  on  gracious  influences,  Tubingen,  1799. 
■♦  See  Dissert,  de  spiritus  sancti  efficientiai,  Note  52. 


^115.]  IMMEDIATE  GRACIOUS  INFLUENCE.  565 

19,  renders  it  probable  that  the  words  "  strengthened  with  might," 
!  dvva(AH,  xgaiaica&fjvai  r^fer  to  some  internal  influence  of  God,  which 
internal  influence  produced  faith  in  the  Christians  of  those  days  (1: 
19,)  and  is  still  operative  in  the  hearts  of  believers  (3:  20,)  through 
the  Holy  Spirit.  Rom.  8:  9,  11,  14,  16.  5:  5.  The  following  texts 
also  refer  to  this  doctrine.  1  Pet.  1:  5,  who  are  kept  by  the  pow- 
er of  God,  through  faith  unto  salvation.  2  Thess.  1:11,  wherefore 
also  we  pray  always  for  you,  that  our  God  would — fulfil  all  the 
good  pleasure  of  his  goodness,  and  the  work  of  faitli  with  power. 
Acts  16:  14,  whose  (Lydia's)  heart  the  Lord  opened,  to  attend  to 
tthe  things  which  were  spoken  of  Paul. 

IV.  It  has  been  proved,  in  '§^  96,  that  Christ  superintends  and 
governs  the  external  circumstances  of  men,  in  such   a  manner  as  is 

I  calculated  to  promote  their  spiritual  welfare. 

V.  Subject  continued. — Ps.  119:  71,  "  Afflictions  produce  the 
salutary  effect  of  making  me  learn  thy  statutes."  Hosea  2:  8 — 16. 
5:  15.  Philem.  15.  comp.  v.  10.  ^  69. 

VI.  That  there  is  an  immediate  divine  influence  on  the  human 
mind,  is  taught  in  the  following  passages: — a)  1  Thess.  2:  13, 
when  ye  received  the  word  of  God,  which  ye  heard  of  us,  ye  re- 
ceived it,  not  as  the  word  of  man,  but  (as  it  in  truth  is)  as  the  word 
of  God,  who  also  worketh  effectually  in  you  that  believe.  The 
pronoun  who,  b'g  cannot,  in  iliis  case,  refer  to  "  the  Word,"  Aoyo?, 
but  must  belong  to  the  word  "  God,"  &(ou,  immediately  preceding 
it.  For,  the  stress  of  the  passage  must  rest  on  the  word  '•  God," 
because  the  design  of  the  apostle  is,  to  confirm  the  truth,  that  the 
doctrines  which  the  Thessalonians  had  heard  from  him,  were  not  of 
human  but  of  divine  origin.  Again,  the  force  of  the  word  "  also, 
i^al  is  this :  ''  even  he  who  wrought  in  the  teacher— so  that  his  in- 
structions, though  given  by  a  man,  were  actually  derived  from  God 
— he  also  worketh  in  those  hearers  who  believe  these  doctrines. 
— b)  Rom.  15:  13,  now  the  God  of  hope  fill  you  with  all  joy  and 
peace  in  believing,  that  ye  may  abound  in  hope,  through  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  latter  words  would  be  superfluous  if  they 
meant  nothing  more  than  this,  "  that  the  Romans  might  be  filled 
with  confidence  {iKildc  v.  12)  through  the  doctrines  which  are  de- 

i  rived  from  the  Holy  Ghost."  For  this  idea  is  already  contained  in 

i  the   preceding  words,    "that   God   might  promote  joy  and  unity 

i  among  you,  through  faith  in  his  saving  doctrines  (^V  luj  maievHv    ) 

1  The  concluding  clause  of  the  verse  appears,  therefore,  rather  to  be 

an  explanation  how  and   how  far  God  is  the  "  God  of  hope    (^c^oe 

iJinldog)  or  of  a  confident  trust  in  him ;  or  how  he  fills  the  hearts  ol 

the  Romans  with  joyful  confidence  through  faith ;  and,  inasmuch  as 

Jews   and  Gentiles  are  by  the  christian  doctrines  entitled  to  equal 

confidence  (v.  8—12,)  how  he  fills  them  with  unity  of  sentimenU 


556  INFLUENCES  OF  GRACE.  [bK.  IV, 


It  teaches  us  that  he  himself  produces  faith  in  the  divine  doctrines, 
and  the  joyful  confidence  [xagciv,  iknlda)  resulting  from  it,  through 
the  Holy  Spirit. — c)  1  Pet.  1:  22,  having  purified  your  souls  in 
obeying  the  truth  through  the  Spirit.  "  Spirit,"  nviuiia,  cannot 
here  signify  the  Gospel,  for  this  is  meant  by  "  the  truth,"  aX7]^Hu  ; 
nor  can  it  mean  the  proper  use  of  the  Gospel,  for  this  is  expressed 
by  *'  obeying  the  truth  ;"  it  must  therefore  necessarily  signify  the 
Holy  Spirit.' — d)  Jude  v.  20,  building  up  yourselves  on  your  most 
holy  faith,  praying  in  [h)  the  Holy  Ghost.  In  this  passage  also, 
the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  joined  with  holy  doctrines  and  personal 
exertion,  and  prayer  recommended  to  us  for  the  very  reason,  that 
the  divine  assistance  is  necessary,  in  order  to  render  the  use  of  the 
doctrines  effectual  in  edifying  and  confirming  us.  The  word  "  in," 
*V,  in  this  passage  signifies  through  or  by  (the  aid  of,)  as  it  also  does 
in  1  Cor.  9:  1.  compare  3:  5 — 9. 

VII.     Nature  of  this  immediate  divine  ivfluence. — Eph.  3:  20. 
comp.  v.  16  etc.    Rom.  8:  9,  11,  16,  26,  the  Spirit   of  God  (the 
Spirit  of  him  that  raised  Jesus  from  the  dead — the  Spirit  of  Christ) 
dwelleth  in  you.     This  Spirit  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit  that 
we  are  the  children  of  God. — Likewise  also  the  Spirit  helpeth  our 
infirmities — The  Spirit  itself  maketh  intercessions  for  us  with  unut- 
terable groanings.      On  these  texts  the  reader  may  consult  the 
Dissertation  on  the  Influences  of  Grace,  »§.  5,  where  it  is  proved 
that  these  passages  distinguish  between  the  work  of  God  (the  Spirit 
of  God,)  and  the   personal  agency  of  the  individual.     The  argu- 
ments are  in  substance  the  following  : — 1.    The  word  nv^vfia  or 
"  Spirit"  cannot  in  v.  26,  signify  a  christian   disposition   produced 
mediately  by  the  Spirit  of  God.    For,  the  groanings  with  which  the 
Spirit  maketh  intercession  for  the  righteous,  cannot  be  groans  utter- 
ed by  the  righteous   themselves.     Such  groans  of  Christians  had 
been  previously  mentioned  (v.  23,)  for  by  virtue  of  its  relation  to  v. 
15 — 18,  this  23d   verse  refers,  not  to  the  groans  of  the   apostles 
alone,  but  to  those  of  Christians  in  general.  And  the  term  ojGuviwg 
likewise  also  (v.  26)  shows  that  the  participation  of  the  Spirit  in  the 
groans  of  believers,  is  different  from  what   preceded.     Moreover, 
the  groans  spoken  of  in  v.  26,  are  not  silent  in  their  nature,  as  those 
of  v.  23  probably  are,  but  they  are  such  groans  as  we  do  not  our- 
selves comprehend,  and  therefore  cannot  clothe  in  words. — 2.  The 
phrase  **  this  Spirit,"  avio  z6  nviu(.i(x,  in  v.  16,  also  cannot  signify 
a  christian  disposition  ;  because  it  evidently  corresponds  to  v.  26, 
and  because  the  interpretation   would  be  unnatural,  to  say,  "  the 
disposition  of  our  spirit  beareth   witness  with  our  Spirit."     If  this 
bad  been  the  idea  it  would  rather  have  been  rnxiv  "  with  us"  than 


1  Dissert,  de  Spiritus  sancti  officientiA,  Note  35, 


>  11^']  IMMEDIATE  GRACIOUS  INFLUENCE.  557 


'  with  our  spirits."  Nor  can  any  appeal  be  made,  in  this  case,  to 
'the  spirit  o(  bondage'' nvtvfza  dovke lag  {v.  15,)  for  this  phrase 
Joes  not  necessarily  signify  a  slavish  disposition  ;  but  the  sentence 
nay  be  rendered  thus  c  •*  ye  have  not  received  a  spirit  that  pro- 

iuces  a  slavish  state"  (comp.  nvevfia  Ttjg  nhTnag  2  Cor.  4:  13.) 

3.  The  passage  v.  9 — 11,  in  connexion  with  the  context,  not  only 
Joes  not  prove  that  nvev^ia  "  Spirit"  means  a  christian  disposition, 
3ut  the  phrase  "  the  spirit  of  him  that  raised  Christ  from  the  dead," 
and  the  proposition  "  that  God  will  raise  the  mortal  bodies  of  be- 
lievers on  account  of  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  them,"  will  not  ad- 
mit of  any  other  sense  in  the  11th  verse,  than  this:  "If  the  Spirit 
Df  God,  or  the  infinite  power  of  God,  is  at  work  in  us  even  now  ; 
then  this  present  agency  of  God  is  a  pledge  to  us  that  he  will  here- 
after raise  our  bodies."  A  christian  disposition  cannot  well  be 
meant  by  "  the  Spirit  of  him  (the  Almighty)  who  raised  Jesus 
fmm  the  dead."  Rom.  5:  5.  "Our  hearts  are  filled  with  confi- 
dence in  the  love  of  God  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  only  because 
he  is  the  Author  of  the  joyful  doctrines  given  by  God,  but  because 
he  is  communicated,  given  to  Christians,  aydntj  tov  '&fov  ixntx^rac 
h'  Toig  aagdiaig  tjf.i(jjv.  (comp.  v.  1:  11.) — dia  nvevficctog  dylov 
loi"'  dox>ti/Tog  rifjilv.  *u4yanr}  lov  x/tov  here  signifies  confidence  in  the 
love  of  God,  as  it  does  in  1  John  4:  17,  18.^ 

VIII.  JVe  cannot  understand  the  mode  of  this  immediate  influ- 
ence.— John  .3:  7,  8.  Every  child  of  God,  that  is,  every  one  who  is 
born  again  {yevvridtig  uvwOev.  v.  3,  7.  Comp.  <§>  110.  111.  5)  unto 
the  attainment  of  eternal  life  or  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  in  other 
words,  every  one  that  believeth  in  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God  (v. 
15,)  becomes  what  he  is,  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  Spirit 
[l}{nveufA.uT(jg]  i.e.  in  an  inexplicable  manner  (v.  8)  through  the 
agency  of  the  incomprehensible  power  of  God  (compare  xaia  nvavfAa 
Gal.  4:  29.) 

Eph.  1:  19,  20,  to  vixeQ^aXXov—ty.  va-AQcav  u  e.  "  God  grant  that 
ye  may  know  what  is  the  transcendant  greatness  of  his  power, 
which  has  been  evinced  in  us,  who  believe  in  him,  by  virtue  of  the 
working  of  his  mighty  power,  by  which  he  wrought  in  Christ,  and 
raised  him  from  the  dead."  This  exposition  of  the  passage  before 
us,  is  vindicated  in  the  Dissertation  on  the  influences  of  grace,  «§>  6, 
where  it  is  proved — 1.  that  this  passage  cannot  refer  to  the  future 
resurrection,  because  the  context  forbids  it  (ch.  2,)  in  which  the  con- 
version of  Jews  and  Pagans  to  Christianity  is  the  subject  of  dis- 
course;  and  because  the  parallel  passage.  Col.  2:  12,  militates 
lagainst  this  explanation.— 2.  That  if  the  true  interpretation  were, 
"  Believe  in  the  agency  of  God  by  which  he  raised  Christ  from  the 

1  See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  John's  Gospel,  p.  214. 


558  INFLUENCES  OF  GRACE.  [bk.  IV, 

dead"  or  "  Believe  in  the  Gospel  on  account  of  the  agency  of 
God  etc,"  the  phraseology  would  be  different.  In  the  first  case, 
Ttaza  would  be  superfluous,  or  at  least  would  be  used  in  a  singular 
manner.  In  the  second  case,  Sia  would  have  been  used  instead  of 
ytaicc.  But  in  either  case,  the  preceding  words  would  have  to  be 
rendered  in  this  forced  manner  :  '•  what  is  the  exceeding  greatness 
of  his  power  which  he  manifested  (in  Christ)  for  our  good."  Eph. 
3:  20.  Heb.  13:  20,  21,  "  May  God  (the  omnipotent)  who  raised 
Jesus  from  the  dead,  perfect  you  [rectify  you,  make  you  right]  in 
every  thing  that  is  good,  and  work  in  you  what  is  pleasing  in  his 
sight."   [xazaQziaat  vfAclg — ifconiov  uviov.] 

IX.  The  reality  of  gracious  influence  known  only  by  its  effects. 
— All  that  we  can  know  on  this  subject  from  our  own  experience  is, 
that  a  salutary  change  has  taken  place  within  us.  But  we  are  not 
conscious  of  an  extraordinary  influence  of  God.  Experience  teaches 
us  the  fact  of  our  change,  but  not  the  cause  which  produced  it. 
Nor  are  these  facts  which  we  observe,  possessed  of  the  same  cri- 
teria of  a  superhuman  nature,  the  same  marks  of  power  exceeding 
the  ability  of  a  soul  enhghtened  by  the  divine  word,  as  are  found  in 
the  fulfihuent  of  a  prediction  of  future  events,  the  occurrence  of 
which  was  altogether  unexpected  by  human  foresight,  and  the  pro- 
duction of  which  the  power  of  man  could  not  have  accomplished. 
The  influences  of  grace  are,  therefore,  not  of  a  miraculous  nature. 
(<5»  37.  111.  2.)  But,  on  the  other  hand,  experience  offers  not  the 
least  evidence  against  their  real  existence,  and  all  the  facts  which 
we  observe  are  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  belief  that  they  do 
«xist,  as  we  are  taught  in  the  word  of  God.' 


SECTION    CXVI. 


The  influences  of  divine  grace  on  Christians  are  suspended  on  the 
use  of  the  word  of  God,  and  are  not  irresistible. 

As  the  salutary  change,  which  will  be  more  particularly  des- 
cribed in  thd  next  book,  is,  in  those  who  are  acquainted  with  God's 
word,  commenced  and  continued(l)  through  the  instrumentality  of 
that  word  ;  we  have  no  reason  to  expect  that  God  will  exert  any 
immediate  influence  on  the  minds  of  those  who  neglect  to  use  the 


'  See  the  Dissert,  on  the  influences  of  grace,  §  2.  Dissert,  de  Spiritus   sancti 
efficiently.  §  II. 


^  116.]  IMMEDIATE  GRACIOUS  INFLUENCE.  55^ 

sacred  oracles.  On  the  contrary,  the  influences  of  grace  among- 
those  to  whom  the  divine  word  is  accessible,  are  suspended  on  » 
proper  use  of  that  word.  Nor  is  the  word  of  God  itself  impotent 
or  inefficient  in  its  nature. (2)  It  is  therefore  unreasonable  for  us  ta 
wait  for  God  to  bestow  a  saving  knowledge  of  divine  truth  on  us^ 
by  immediate  revelation.  This  knowledge  can  be  expected  only 
from  a  proper  use  of  the  word  of  God  itself. (3)  For  it  was  for  our 
instruction  that  the  revelation  was  given  us  by  God,  and  if  we  could 
obtain  this  knowledge  from  any  other  source,  the  word  of  God 
would  be  superfluous.  Nor  are  those  religious  feelings  which  by 
the  divine  aid,  are  excited  and  cherished  within  us(4)  for  the  pur- 
pose of  assisting  us  in  our  conflict  with  the  sinful  propensities  of  our 
nature,  either  independent  of  our  knowledge  of  divine  truth,  or  con- 
trary to  the  principles  of  our  moral  nature.  On  the  contrary  they 
are  in  perfect  accordance  with  our  religious  knowledge,  and  are  in 
one  respect  within  the  power  of  man  ;(5)  he  can  cherish  and  obey 
them,  and  act  in  conformity(6)  to  those  views  of  religious  truth 
(Matt.  13:  23,  19)  with  which  they  are  connected  (Rom.  8:  4, 13,) 
or  by  a  different  course  of  conduct  he  can  neglect  and  suppress 
thera.(7) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Instrumentality  of  the  divine  tvord  in  changing  the  moral 
character  of  man. — John  17:  20,  "  through  the  instrumentality  of 
my  divine  doctrines  {iv  zrj  aXtjx^eia)  preserve  them  as  thine  own  (v. 
11.,)  separated  from  the  world  and  the  lord  of  this  world  {ayluGov."^) 
John  8:  31,  32,  "  If  ye  obey  my  doctrines  (.MtWti/  i.  q.  Tr^(Jiiv  v.  51) 
ye  shall  be  my  true  disciples  ;  for  ye  shall  so  know  the  truth,  and 
the  truth  will  make  you  free  from  the  dominion  of  sin  {n  ah'jx^eia 
ikfvOfOMGst  v(xag''^)  Matt.  7:  24.  Luke  8:  11,15,  but  that  on  the 
good  ground  are  they  which  in  an  honest  and  good  heart,  having 
heard  the  word,  keep  it,  and  bring  forth  fruit  with  patience.  Rom. 
10:  13—17.  1  Thess.  2:  16,  (the  Jews)  forbidding  us  to  speak  to 
the  gentiles,  that  they  might  be  saved.  1  Cor.  4:  15,  I  have  be- 
gotten you  through  the  Gospel.  15:  1,  2,  the  Gospel— by  which 
ye  are  saved.  1  Pet.  1:  23,  being  born  again  by  the  word  of  God 
which  liveth   forever  (that  is  through  the  Gospel  v.  25.)  2:  2,  as 


1  Dissert.  II.  in  LL.  N.  Test,  liistor.  Note  7 

2  Dissert.  I.  in  LL.  N.  Test,  hlstor.  p.  86. 


560  INFLUENCES  OF  GRACE.  [bK.  IV. 

new-born  babes,  desire  the  sincere  milk  of  the  word,  that  ye  may 
grow  thereby.  James  1:  18.  See  <§>  115.  111.2.  v.  21 ,  receive  with 
meekness  the  ingrafted  word,  which  is  able  to  save  your  souls. 
Compare  «§.  121. 

II.  The  word  of  God  is  not  impotent  or  inefficient  in  its  nature, 
— Acts  20:  32,  and  now,  brethren,  I  commend  you  to  God  and  the 
word  of  his  grace.  Rom.  1:  16,  it  (the  Gospel  of  Christ)  is  the 
power  of  God  unto  salvation,  to  every  one  that  believeth.  The 
immediate  influence  of  grace  and  the  logico-moral  influence,  i.  e. 
the  moral  suasion  of  the  word  of  God,  are  so  closely  combined,  that 
they  cannot  be  distinguished  from  one  another,  inasmuch  as  their 
influence  is  exerted  jointly. * 

III.  Supernatural  revelations  of  divine  truth  are  not  to  be  ex- 
pected. Luke  16:29,  they  have  Moses  and  the  prophets,  let  them 
hear  them.^  Inspiration  or  the  immediate  super-natural  communica- 
tion of  a  knowledge  of  divine  truth,  will  remain  the  exclusive  prero- 
gative of  the  extraordinary  messengers  of  God.  It  is  necessary  that 
they  should  demonstrate  the  divinity  of  their  mission  by  deeds 
which  transcend  the  powers  of  human  nature,  that  is,  by  miracles, 
in  order  that  they  may  justly  claim  faith  in  their  instructions.  But 
when  the  New  Testament  speaks  of  Christians  in  general,  and  says 
that  they  must  be  enlightened  or  instructed  by  God  himself  {(fcotta- 
&7Jvai,  Xa^slv  ini'yvcoacv ;)  the  idea  intended  is,  that  it  is  necessary 
for  all  Christians  to  have  a  vital,  a  practical  knowledge  of  the  truth, 
that  is,  such  a  knowledge  as  is  attended  with  correspondent  good 
feelings,  and  followed  by  such  a  course  of  conduct  as  is  dictated  by 
the  word  of  God.  In  Heb.  6:  4,  and  10:  26,  the  phrases  "  to  re- 
ceive a  knowledge  of  the  truth"  and  "to  be  enlightened,"  are  used 
as  synonymous.  According  to  Eph.  1:  17  etc,  those  to  whom  God 
has  given  a  knowledge  of  himself  (Col.  1:  9,  a  knowledge  of  his 
will,)  have  had  the  eyes  of  their  understanding  opened.  And 
Koppe  adduces  several  passages  of  the  LXX  in  which  the  word 
<f)(oii^tLv  to  enlighten  is  used  for  the  Hebrew  tinin  to  teach,  but  at 
the  same  time  remarks,  that  in  most  passages  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment in  which  it  occurs,  this  word  does  not  signify  the  mere  act  of 
teaching.^  1  John  2:  3,  hereby  we  know  that  we  have  known  him 
(Christ)  if  we  keep  his  commandments.  Col.  1:  10.  1  Cor.  8:  3, 
"  if  any  man  love  God,  the  same  is  known  of  him  (the  same  has 
received  from  God  a  living  knowledge  of  the  truth.")  Neverthe- 
less, to  the  attainment  of  such  a  living  and  practical  knowledge  of 


1  Dissert,  de  Spiritus  sancti  efficientid,  §  6. 

2  Dissertation  of  the  influences  of  grace,  §  1. 

3  See   also   Schleusner's  Lex.  voc.  tponitio  No.  3.     Reinhard's  Docrmatik.  d. 
496.  No.  2.  ^  '  *' 


^  1 16.]  NATURE  OF  GRACE.  561 


the  truth  as  is  above  mentioned,  the  divine  aid  of  course  is  requisite. 
And  our  views  of  divine  truth  are,  moreover,  improved  and  promo- 
ted by  the  conscientious  desire  to  conform  our  life  to  the  holy 
word  ;  whereas,  a  love  of  sin  and  the  indulgence  of  forbidden  pro- 
pensities tend,  not  only  to  destroy  our  love  of  truth,  but  also  to 
obscure  our  views  of  the  divine  word.^ 

IV.  But  the  divine  aid  may  be  expected  in  the  use  of  means. 
Kant  himself  concedes  that  such  a  divine  influence  may  be  admit- 
ted, provided  no  violence  be  offered  to  the  moral  agency  of  man. 
"  It  is  a  principle  (he  says)  of  practical  religion,  that  every  indi- 
vidual is  under  obligation  to  exert  himself  to  the  utmost  of  his  pow- 
er in  order  to  accomplish  his  reformation,  and  that  only  after  this 
has  been  done,  can  he  reasonably  expect  that  the  deficiency  will  be 
supplied  by  a  higher  power.  All  that  we  can  determine  on  the 
point  is,  that  gracious  influences  are  possible,  and  perhaps  that  they 
are  absolutely  necessary,  to  ensure  success  to  our  exertions  after 
holiness.  It  is  evident  that  it  must  be  possible  for  man  to  become 
what  it  is  designed  that  he  should  be,  that  is,  conformed  to  the  di- 
vine will.  And  if  this  cannot  be  accomplished  by  the  use  of  his 
natural  powers,  we  are  authorized  to  expect  that  God  will  aid  us  by 
his  gracious  influence."^ 

V.  Gracious  influences  may  be  cherished  or  suppressed,  by  the 
individual  who  is  favoured  with  them.  On  the  subject  of  the  effi- 
cacy of  the  word  of  God,  of  the  cooperative  influence  of  God  with 
the  word,  and  of  the  influence  of  man  over  the  feelings  thus  awak- 
ened in  him,  we  refer  the  reader  to  the  Dissert,  de  Spiritus  Sancti 
efficientia,  •§>  XVI,  XVIII,  XIX  ;  and  the  Dissertation  on  the  in- 
fluences of  grace.  The  following  are  the  prominent  ideas  contain- 
ed in  these  works  : — 1.  In  the  influences  of  grace,  it  is  presupposed 
that  the  mind  of  the  subject  has  comprehended  the  doctrines  or 
truths  of  God's  word.— 2.  The  effect  which  God  produces  in  an 
immediate  manner,  consists  in  a  susceptibility  of  the  heart  to  re- 
ceive to  itself  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Volume.— 3.  If  with  sincere 
self  application  we  meditate  upon  the  truths  of  God's  word  (that  is 
if  we  suffer  our  hearts  to  be  opened,)  every  individual  truth  will 
produce  that  effect  which,  by  virtue  of  its  own  nature,  it  is  calcula- 
ted to  produce  ;  that  is,  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  our  mental  opera- 
tions [psychological  principles,]  it  will  produce  those  feelings  and 
those  volitions  which  accord  with  its  nature.  This  is  the  logico- 
moral  influence  of  the  doctrine,  or  moral  suasion.  The  peculiar 
nature  of  this  influence,  therefore,  depends  on  the  nature  of  the 

1  See  the  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  Note  61  and  §  107.  111.  3  supra. 

2  See  Rapp  on  the  springs  of  human  action,  especially  those  of  the  chneimu 
religion. 

71 


562  INFLUENCES  OF  GRACE.  [bK.  IV. 

truth  itself,  but  the  fact  that  it  exerts  any  influence,  results  from  the 
immediate  agency  of  God. — 4.  The  operations  of  grace  do  not  con- 
sist in  or  involve  any  violation  of  the  laws  of  our  moral  agency. 
There  is  no  moral  coercion.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  we  cannot 
prevent  the  religious  convictions  and  feelings  excited  in  the  soul  by 
the  immediate  agency  of  God  ;  but  we  are  able  to  suppress  them 
after  they  have  been  excited,  or  to  cherish  them  by  yielding  obedi- 
ence to  them.  In  short,  the  effects  of  those  feelings  are  under  our 
control.  And  this  is  the  case,  not  merely  in  the  first  religious  im- 
pressions, but  in  every  subsequent  gracious  influence. — 5.  The 
doctrine  of  gracious  influences  harmonizes  perfectly  with  the  im- 
portant truth,  that  sanctification  is  a  gradual  and  progressive  work; 
as  is  clear  even  from  the  fact,  that  these  influences  are  suspended  on 
the  use  of  the  word  of  God,  which  cannot  possibly  be  the  work  of 
a  moment.  And  even  if  this  were  not  the  case,  it  would  still  be  in 
the  power  of  God,  to  carry  on  this  work  in  the  human  soul  gradu- 
ally ;  although  if  it  were  his  will,  he  might  also  advance  the  soul  to 
absolute  perfection  in  an  instant. 

The  practical  importance  of  this  doctrine  concerning  the  influen- 
ces of  grace,  is  briefly  discussed  in  the  Dissertation  on  gracious  in- 
fluences, and  is  treated  more  at  large  in  the  "  Dissertatio  qua  doc- 
trina  de  Spiritus  Sancti  in  mentibus  nostris  efiicientia,  momento  suo 
ponderatur."^  The  prominent  positions  relative  to  the  importance 
of  this  doctrine,  which  are  assumed  in  these  works,  are  the  follow- 
ing : — 1.  This  doctrine  places  the  depravity  of  our  nature  in  alight 
which  inspires  us  with  a  deep  sense  of  our  unworthiness,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  does  not  discourage  the  hope  of  salvation. — 2.  It  pro- 
motes, in  a  high  degree,  a  grateful  love  to  God,  from  whom  all  gra- 
cious influence  proceeds,  for  this  inestimable  gift. — 3.  It  inspires  us 
with  courage  in  the  accomplishment  of  every  good  resolution,  by 
^tssuring  ms  of  the  divine  aid. — 4.  It  tends  to  subdue  levity  and 
indolence,  by  teaching  us  that  the  guilt  of  those  who  continue  in 
their  sins,  is  aggravated  by  the  fact,  that  God  himself  exerts  an 
immediate  influence  on  them  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  their 
salvation. — 5.  It  confirms  our  hope  of  happiness  in  the  life  to  come, 
by  the  representation,  that  even  in  the  present  life,  God  is  engaged 
in  cooperating  in  an  immediate  manner  to  effect  our  salvation. — 6. 
It  enhances  our  regard  for  our  fellow-men,  and  increases  our  ardour 
to  labour  for  their  salvation  with  modest  humility. 

That  the  doctrine  of  gracious  influences,  when  properly  under- 
stood, has  no  tendency  either  to  diminish  our  regard  for  the  instruc- 
tions of  reason  or  Scripture,  or  to  cherish  enthusiasm  or  inactivity, 
is  proved  in  the  Dissert,  above  cited,  <§>  II,  III. 

1  See  Flatt  on  Moral  Agency  and  Absolute  Election,  Magazine  Vol.  I.  p.  213. 


*  J  OBACE  NOT  IRRESISTIBLE.  663 

1  JLh  ?  7  '"fluence  ,s  different,  even  among  .hose  who  cherish 
the  good  feehngs  excued  ,n  them  by  the  immediate  agery  of  God 
and  act  m  conformity  to  the  directions  of  the  Holy  word.  Va.t  13! 
8  23,  some  brought  forth  a  hundred,  some  sixty,  and  ome  thiri 
fold.  This  diversity  may  arise  from  the  different  degrees  of  c^l 
fulness  with  which  these  gracious  influences  are  cherlhed,  or  f^m 
the  different  degrees  of  faithfulness  evinced  in  obeying  the  instw^ 
tioDs  of  the  holy  word,  or  from  a  diversity  of  disposition  talent  me^ns 
or^  mcentives  to  understand  and  appl/the  d'octrines  rf  the  tcred 

VII.  Grace  is  not  irresistible — Matt.  13:  20—22  some  rp 
ceived  the  seed  of  the  word  into  stony  places-some  amoT.  the 
dnjrns.  Rom.  8:  12;  13  for  if  ye  live  after  the  flesh,  ye  s"K ; 
but  ,f  ye,  through  the  Spirit,  do  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  flesh,  ye 
shall  hve.  Eph  4:  30,  grieve  not  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God.  Acts  7: 
51— 53,  ye  stiff  necked!  ye  do  always  resist  the  Holy  Spirit :  as 
your  fathers  did,  so  do  ye.  Acts  24:  25.  When  the^onscience 
ot  1'  elix  had  been  awakened  by  the  discourse  of  Paul,  Felix  di- 
rected him  to  "  go  his  way  for  this  time." 


BOOK  V, 


OF  A  CHANGE  OF  HEART  AND  REFORMATION  OF 
LIFE,  AND  THEIR  RELATION  TO  OUR  ATTAIN- 
MENT OF  SALVATION. 


PART    L 


OF  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH, 


SECTION    CXVII. 


Nature  of  justification  [yardon']  by  faith. 

Although  the  obedience  of  Christ  (Rom.  5:  18,  19.  <§>  87,)  and 
particularly  that  obedience  which  he  manifested  in  submitting  to  an 
ignominious  death, (1)  procured  pardon  for  all  men  (*§>  6Q,)  that  is, 
procured  for  them  "justification  of  life"  (diKaiwaiv  Can?  Rom.  5: 
18,)  or  an  exemption  from  future  punishment  (from  'AUTaxgifAa  v. 
18.  or  ogyrj  v.  9)  and  access  to  salvation  :(2)  still  this  blessing,  which 
is  general  in  its  nature,  cannot  be  bestowed  on  those  who,  from  an 
habitual  disobedience  to  the  dictates  of  conscience  (<§>  72,)  wicked- 
ly refuse  to  accept  it.  That  is,  it  will  not  be  bestowed  on  those 
who,  although  they  had  an  opportunity  of  becoming  acqainted  with 
the  news  of  this  general  pardon, (3)  nevertheless  do  not  believe  it ; 
either  because  they  do  not  institute  a  particular  and  impartial  inves- 
tigation of  its  truth,  and,  on  the  contrary,  even  sedulously  shun  its 
evidences ;  or  at  least,  because  they  suppress  those  religious  feelings 
and  convictions  which  were  excited  in  their  minds  by  the  truths  of 


'S*  117.]  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH.  565 


Scripture  and  the  immediate  influence  of  God  (^  115.)  By  "  re- 
ceiving the  offered  pardon,"  is  meant  a  sincere  belief  that  the  rep- 
resentations of  Scripture  and  the  promises  connected  with  this 
scheme  of  mercy  are  true,  and  an  apphcation  of  these  general  prom- 
ises to  ourselves,(4)  wiih  the  approbation  of  our  understanding  and 
the  cordial  assent  of  the  feelings  of  our  heart. (5)  The  meaning 
of  the  proposition,  "  we  are  justified  by  faith,"(6)  is  therefore  this, 
"  Although  we  are  guilty  beings,(7)  we  shall  be  treated(8)  by  God 
the  Judge  (Rom.  8:  33)  as  if  we  were  innocent,  nay,  even  as  if  we 
were  positively  good  ;(9)  we  shall  be  delivered  from  future  punish- 
ments(lO)  and  even  from  the  fear  of  them;(ll)  we  shall  obtain 
pardon  of  sin, (12)  and  even  blessed(13)  with  the  hope  of  an  exalt- 
ed, glorious  salvation, (14)  a  hope  which  sinful  beings  can,  of  them- 
selves, never  lay  claim  ; — but  all  this  is  suspended  on  the  condition, 
(15)  that  we  believe(16)  the  doctrine  concerning  the  salvation  pur- 
chased for  us  by  Christ,(17)  and  the  appointments  of  God  in  ref- 
erence to  it, — that  we  repose  our  hope  and  confidence(18)  in  Christ, 
(19)  and  particularly  in  his  death  upon  the  cross,(20)  by  which  he 
purchased  salvation  for  us — that  is,  that  we  put  our  trust  in  God,, 
who  provided(21)  for  our  salvation  by  this  particular  scheme  of  mer- 
cy (<§>  75.  111.  1,)  that  we  acknowledge  this  love  of  God  and  of 
Christ,  and  be  impressed  with  the  deepest  and  most  hvely  sense  of 
it.(22) 

Illustrations. 

I.  Rom.  5:  9,  being  justified  by  his  blood.  <§>  88 — 91. 

II.  Rom.  5:  18,  "  By  the  justification  of  one,  justification  of  life 
was  extended  to  all  men."  As  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  merited 
justification  by  his  obedience  unto  the  death  of  the  cross,  and  by  his 
resurrection  and  ascension  to  glory,  we  were  at  the  same  time  pro- 
nounced justified  for  his  sake  ;  and  justified  in  such  a  manner,  that 
we  are  not  only  delivered  from  punishments,  but  have  also  a  glori- 
ous salvation  (C^V?  life  v.  18)  promised  unto  us,  and  are  permitted 
to  rejoice  in  the  special  favour  of  God  (v.  11.)^ 

III.  For  the  proof  of  this  position,'  see  «§.  71.  111.  5  ;  and  the 
work,  On  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  685—687. 

IV.  We  must  appropriate  to  ourselves  these  doctnnes  and  prom- 


1  See  the  work  on  the  Deaign  of  the  death  of  Jesas,  p. 


637. 


566  JUSTIFICATION.  [bK.  IV, 

ises.  Rom.  6:  11.  (See  III.  5.)  Gal.  2:  19,  for  I,  through  the  law, 
am  dead  to  the  law.  Phil.  3:  8  etc.  1  Tim.  1:  15,  Christ  Jesus 
came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners,  of  whom  I  am  the  chief. 

V.  Our  understanding  and  heart  must  approve  and  embrace  the 
plan.  Rom.  6:  11,  likewise  reckon  [Aoy/C*aiL^f,  consider,  judge]  ye 
also  yourselves  to  be  dead  indeed  unto  sin.  2  Cor.  5:  14,  we  thus 
judge.  It  is,  nevertheless,  possible  that  a  genuine  and  saving  faith 
(Luke  18:  14)  may  be  accompanied  with  fear  and  a  sense  of  guilt, 
and  therefore  manifest  itself  rather  by  an  ardent  longing  after  grace, 
than  by  a  placid  serenity  of  soul. 

VI.  Justification  by  faith  is  taught—Rom.  5:  1.^  3:  28,  30.  Gal. 
2:  16,  dtitatovad^at  tn  nlaieojg  (did  zijg  ntaiecDg,  niaiii,  did  nlaieMg 
*Jrjaov  Xgiaiov.) 

VII.  It  is  sinners  that  are  justified.  Rom.  4:  5,  the  "  ungodly" 
{tov  das^rj)  are  justified.  3:  22 — 24,  for  all  have  sinned — being 
justified  freely  (i.  e.  gratuitously,  dcogedv)  by  his  (God's)  grace. 

VIII.  Nature  of  justification — a  forensic  act. — God  justifies  us 
or  pronounces^  us  just,  diTiatot,  when  he  does  not  impute  unto  us, 
the  sins  of  which  he  knows  we  are  guilty  (Rom.  4:  5,)  and  does  not 
inflict  the  punishment  which  these  crimes  deserved  ;  but  on  the 
contrary,  by  an  unmerited  judicial  act  of  pardon,  imputes  to  us  an 
innocence  and  righteousness,  which  authorize  us  to  expect  a  great 
salvation,^  (dcogedv  trj  avrov  %dQVTt,  Rom.  3:  24  ;)  although  he  well 
knows  how  void  we  are  of  the  proper  moral  character  (dixatoavvtj)^ 
— he  justifies  us  when  we  come  under  a  sense  of  our  own  misery 
and  want  of  personal  merit  {idla  diKaioavvrj  Rom.  10:  3.  Phil.  3: 
9,)  take  refuge  in  the  offered  grace  ;  and  he  accepts  this  our  confi- 
dence in  his  grace  in  place  of  that  innocence  and  holiness  which  we 
ought  to  possess  [niaiig  Xoyi^eiat,  dg  dixawovvrjv^y  but  of  which 
we  are  void ;  when  he  treats  us  as  innocent  and  morally  good  he- 
inous, when  he  declares  us  to  be  exempted  from  the  punishment  of 
those  sins  which  we  actually  did  commit,  holds  forth  to  us  the  hope 
of  an  unmerited  salvation,  and  thus  by  acts'^  declares  us  innocent 

1  Jixaiovv  corresponds  to  the  Hebrew  p-isj  in  Hiphilor  Piel ;  and  signifies, 
to  cause  one  to  be  regarded  as  just  {dinaiov  a7ro(pdt,vHv  as  the  LXX  use  it  in  Job 
32:  2.)     See  the  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis  dixatog  §  XX. 

2  Rom.4:  7,  to  forgive — to  hide — not  to  impute  one's  s'lUB,  dfiivou. — imxa- 
XvTiTsiv  rag  dfiaqrlag  i.  q.  fir^  Xojyitead'at.  v.  8  compared  with  2  Cor.  5:  19.  2  Tim. 
4:  16. 

3  Rom.  3:  23,  vatsqovvtat  rijg  §6^7jg  rov  dsov  '-'  they  want  [are  without]  the 
approbation  of  God."  Comp.  John  12:  43.  and  the  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  §  XVI. 

4  Rom.  4-.  5,  9,  3,  22,  23  etc.  Thus,  also,  Teller,  in  his  Lexicon  of  the  New 
Testament,  explains  this  expression  :  *'  the  confident  trust  of  a  converted  sinner 
in  the  paternal  mercy  of  God,  for  the  pardon  of  his  past  sins,  is  imputed  to  him 
for  merit,  is  accepted,  instead  of  that  merit  which  he  does  not  possess.  The 
question  here  is  not,  What  is  the  real  merit  of  man  .'  but  What  has  God  prom- 
ised to  accept  instead  of  it.^" 


"^  ilT.]  JUSTIFICATION  NOT  BY  WORKS. 


567 


and  righteous,  dUai,oq.\     Accordingly,  that  act  of  the  divine  favour 
by  which  guilty  men  are  acquitted,  and,  notwithstanding  their  want 
of  personal  merit,  are  treated  as  morally  worthy  and  meritorious  is 
in  the  New  Testament,  termed  dmamovvr^^  as  in  2  Cor  3-  9  Rom' 
10:  4,  10.  8:  10.  John  16:  8,  10.  Heb.  5:  13  '?  or  properly  di^ui 
oavi>n  EK  OEOTov   "the  righteousness  of  (from)  God,"  as  it  is 
termed  in  Phil.  3:  9  ;  or  more   briefly,  dixaioavvrj  ^^oJ,  that  is  a 
righteousness  or  worthiness  not  founded  on  the  personal'  merit  of 
men,  but  imputed  to  them  by  the  free  grace  of  God,  and  as  a  gift 
of  God.  Rom.  5:  19.  1: 17.    3:  21.3  j^  ^^ese  passages,  dcxaioavvri 
righteousness,   is  synonymous   with  dmuifaaig  justification  •  comp 
Rom.  3:  21  with  v.  24,  26,  28,  30.  ' 

The  signification  of  the  phrase  "to  impute  righteousness" 
loyi^i(i{>aL  dijtaioouvTiv  Rom.  4:  6,  11,  is  discussed  in  the  Dissert, 
de  sensu  vocis  dlyMiog^  xiv — xvi.  The  following  are  the  prominent 
ideas  of  these  sections. — 1.  dcTiaioovvt]  righteousness  is  never  per- 
fectly synonymous  with  awxriQla  salvation  ;  e.  g.  Rom.  9:  30.  10: 
4.  The  former  does,  indeed,  in  some  passages  include  amrjgiav  or 
4'co?f// salvation  or  life,  but  it  at  the  same  time  embraces  also  the 
condition  of  this  amrriQiav,  that  is,  integrity.  Just  as  this  remark  is 
evidently  true  in  reference  to  the  phrase  "  the  righteousness  of  the 
law,"  ri  diYMcoGvvfi  r]  Iy.  voftov,  so  also  it  is  applicable  to  the  opposite 

phrase  "  the  righteousness  of  faith,  >J  dvyiuioavvri  »;  h  niaieoig. 2. 

The  phrase  "  righteousness  of  faith,"  dtxuioavi^t]  nlaifojg,  is  in  many- 
cases  distinguished  from  "  life"  Cojrj.  Rom.  5:  17,  21.  8:  10.  1:  17, 
the  just  shall  live  by  faith. — 3.  "  To  impute  any  thing  to  a  person  "" 
XopCiodui  Tivi  Ti  or  f'/g  tt,  is  indeed  used  to  designate  the  active 
(renumerative  or  punitive)  imputation  of  excellencies  which  are 
really  possessed,  or  of  actions  which  were  really  performed,  as  in 
Ps.  106:  30.  Levit.  7:  18.  1  Cor.  13:  5  ;  but  it  is  also  used  to  ex- 
press an  active  imputation  of  excellencies  which  the  person  does  not 

1  See  tile  Dissert,  sup.  cit.  §  XX,  XXVI.  Aixaiovv  sometimes  signifies  "to 
declare  ty  deeds  that  a  person  is  righteou.*!,"  as  in  Ezek.  16:  51,  Ecclus.  31:  5. 
The  deeds  by  which  God  pronounces  the  believer  just,  are,  the  assurance  of 
liberation  from  punishment  and  of  salvation  throuorli  that  Gospel  which  ho  has 
received  in  faith,  and  the  communication  of  that  Spirit  who  produces  salutary 
changes  of  both  an  internal  and  external  nature  in  man. 

2  In  2  Cor.  3:  9,  the  word  "righteousness"  is  contrasted  with  "  condemna- 
tion ;"  and  in  Rom.  10:  10,  it  corresponds  to  the  word  "  salvation."  See  the  Dis- 
sert, sup.  cit.  §  XIII.  The  passage,  John  16:  10,  contains  the  proposition,  "  we 
owe  our  liberation  from  punishment  to  Christ's  going  to  the  Father,  i.  e.  to  his- 
<ieath  and  the  glorification  which  succeeded  it." 

3  Jixaioavvj]  }m.  d-€ov=Stxaioav'v7j  and  ■&sov—in=Lan6,  and  both=ja  see  ICor^ 
7:  7.  In  the  expression  "  the  righteousness  of  God,"  the  genitive  ^ov  "  of  God," 
expresses  the  cause  just  as  the  preposition  in  does  in  the  other  phrase.^  Thus 
also,  the  phrases  Simtoovvt]  marsm  (Rom.  4: 11,)  and  OMOioavvrj  ix  or  Cm  niars- 
Mi,  are  synonymous.  Rom.  1:  17.  3:  .32. 


568  JUSTIFICATION.  [bK.  V. 

possess,  and  of  acts  which  he  did  not  perform.  According  to  the 
latter  sense,  the  phrase  "  to  impute  righteousness  to  any  one," 
koyiCfod^ai^  dtxccioavftjv  rtvl,  signifies  "  to  impute  [attribute]  to  a 
person  a  righteousness  which  he  does  not  possess,  so  that  he  shall 
be  treated  as  a  righteous  person;"  and  "  to  count  (or  impute)  faith 
for  righteousness,  Xoyi^ea^Jat,  uIgtiv  tig  diKaioavvi^v,  means  ''  to  im- 
pute faith  to  an  individual  as  if  it  were  a  meritorious  act — to  account 
faith  as  a  virtue  deserving  of  reward."  {tig  or  the  Heb.  b=coV. 
Rom.  2:  26.  Job.  39:  16.  Isaiah  29: 16, 17.  It  is  only  in  this  sense 
that  the  phrases  "  to  account  for  righteousness"  and  "  to  impute 
righteousness"  can  be  applied  in  Rom.  4:  5,  6,  where  "an  ungodly 
person,"  a  "righteousness  without  works"  is  the  subject  of  discourse. 
— 4.  The  proposition  "  God  graciously  regards  and  treats  us  as 
morally  good  persons,"  embraces  more  than  the  sentence  "  we  ob- 
tain salvation  through  the  grace  of  God."  The  latter  is  compre- 
hended in  the  former,  but  the  former  also  includes  the  idea  that  the 
moral  excellence  [the  obedience]  of  Christ  is  the  ground  of  our  sal- 
vation. Rom.  5:  19. 

IX.  That  we  are  treated  as  though  we  were  righteous,  is  evddent 
from  the  fact  that  we  are  not  only  liberated  from  punishment  just  as 
if  we  were  innocent,  but  that,  notwithstanding  our  unworthiness, 
(Rom.  3:  23,)  that  salvation,  ^wrj,  which  the  righteous  alone  [tXnlg 
dixawnvi^fjg)  are  authorized  to  expect,  is  graciously  bestowed  on  us, 
just  as  if  we  had  merited  it  by  obedience  to  the  law.  Rom.  2:  13. 
But  before  we  could  be  treated  as  righteous  and  as  worthy  of  the 
heavenly  happiness,  it  was  necessary  that  all  obstacles  should  be 
removed,  by  the  death  of  our  Redeemer  {§  88.  111.  4.)  For,  on 
the  principles  of  justice,  we  were  so  far  from  being  entitled  to  ad- 
mission into  heaven,  that  we  even  deserved  to  be  excluded  from  it: 
we  had  not  only  not  merited  reception  into  the  heavenly  kingdom 
by  any  obedience,  but  on  the  contrary,  our  forefather  Adam,  and 
we  ourselves  had  actually  deserved  to  be  excluded  from  it  by  our 
sins.  It  was  necessary  therefore  that  the  general  punishment  of 
banishment  from  the  kingdom  of  God  should  be  removed,  as  well 
as  the  particular  punishment  of  exclusion  from  future  salvation  which 
every  one  had  individually  merited  by  his  own  personal  guilt.  And 
not  until  all  this  was  accomplished,  were  the  demands  of  the  law 
perfectly  satisfied. 

Gal.  5:  5,  "  we  expect  from  faith  that  which  righteousness  alone 
in  entitled  to  expect — that  which  is  the  object  of  her  (righteousness') 
hope.  Compare  Rom.  8:  24,  where  iknldi  is  equivalent  to  to  antx- 
de'xto&ai,  v.  24,  but  immediately  afterwards  iXnlg  designates  the 
object  of  hope  o  iknlCtt  ^ig-'"  The  scheme  of  salvation  through 
Christ  suspends  the  fulfilment  of  those  promises  which  the  law 
makes  to  righteousness  (i.  e.  the  observance  of  all  the  requisitions  of 


^    1  n.]  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH.  569 


the  law,)  not  on  our  works,  but  on  our  reliance  on  the  merits  of  the 
Son  of  God.i  But  that  flnig  dixaioavvrjg  hope  of  righteousness,  is 
nothing  else  than  Cw»i  or  "  life,"  is  evident  from  a  comparison  of 
Gal.  3:  12.  Rom.  10:  5. 

X.  "  To  justify,"  dixmovi',  signifies  to  pronounce  a  person  free 
from  punishment,  and  therefore  also  indicates  the  consequence  of 
this  acquittal,  viz.  actual  liberation  from  punishment.^  For  this 
liberation  from  punishment  the  children  of  God  are  indebted  to  the 
death  of  Christ,  inasmuch  as  he  thereby  suffered  the  punishment  for 
us,  and  thus  gave  a  display  of  the  justice  of  God.  Rom.  3:  24 — 26. 
^89,91. 

XI.  Rom.  8:  33.  10:  4,  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law,  in  order 
that  all  who  believe  might  obtain  righteousness,  compared  with  2 
Cor.  3:  9,  where  drAuioavvt]  righteousness,  is  contrasted  with  the 
"  condemnation"  threatened  by  tlie  Mosaic  law.  Rom.  5:  1,9. 

XII.  Rom.  4:  5 — 8.  Acts  13:  38.  In  both  these  passages  the 
phrases  "  remission  of  sins,"  aqeoig  diiuQiiMv — dvofimt',  and  "  to 
justify,"  ^fcxa^oiJi/,  are  used  synonymously. 

Xill.  In  the  Dissert,  de  sensu  vocis  dixatog,  ^  xxv,  it  is  proved 
that  "justification,"  ^fxft/ojof?,  includes  "  life,"  ^a>7if.  For  this  sal- 
vation which  is  enjoyed  in  part  at  present,  but  which  is  chiefly  re- 
served for  the  future  world  (Rom.  8:  24,)  we  are  indebted  to  the 
obedience  of  Christ  (^  88  ;)  and  particularly  to  his  death,  as  that 
was  the  most  illustrious  display  of  his  obedience  {§  88.)  Hence, 
as  we  are  indebted  for  our  justification,  drAalmoiv,  or  for  the  right- 
eousness, diautoGuiffj,  imputed  to  us,  to  that  obedience  in  consequence 
of  which  Christ  was  pronounced  just  (Rom.  5:  18  ;)  there  is  nothing 
reprehensible  in  the  common  phrase,  "  the  righteousness  [obedience] 
of  Christ  is  imputed  to  "  us."  In  consequence  of  the  obedience  of 
Christ,  or  by  virtue  of  the  reward  granted  to  the  obedience  of  Christ, 
we  are  treated  as  if  we  had  yielded  a  perfect  obedience,  and  had 
thereby  made  ourselves  worthy  of  so  great  a  salvation. 

The  solemn  acknowledgement  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  in- 
cludes th'e  right  which  he  acquired  to  treat  us  as  if  we  were  right- 
eous, and  to  bestow  salvation  upon  us.^ 

XIV.  The  believer  has  the  hope  oj  an  exalted  salvation.— Rom. 
5: 1,  2,  being  justified— we  rejoice  in  the  hope  of  the  glory  of  God. 
8:  30,  them  whom  he  justified  he  also  glorified.  Tit.  3:  7,  that  being 
justified  we  should  be  made  heirs— of  eternal  life.  Gal.  3:  ll,jhe 
just  shall 
3:  9,  so  then, 

XV.  Fau.... .^   ^   .  ,    , 

dtxatoa6vfj,  which  is  graciously  bestowed  by  God,  is  suspended  oa 

1  Ibid.  444.  2  Dissert,  do  sensu  vocis  Sixaios  §  34. 

3  See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  the  atonement,  p.  591. 
72 


570  JUSTIFICATION.  [bK.  V. 

the  condition  of  faith,"  inl  niaift.     Gal.  2:  16.  Rom.  3:  22,26.  4: 
11,24.  10:  4.1 

XVI.  Faith  the  condition . — Rom.  10:  4.  comp.  6 — 10.  1:  16, 
for  therein  (in  the  Gospel)  is  the  righteousness  of  God  revealed 
from  faith  to  faith,  ix  nlaifajg  eiQuiGriv^  i.  e.  revealed  in  order  that 
we  should  believe  in  it.  3:  21. 

XVII.  Rom.  10:  4,  10.  Here,  "  to  believe  unto  righteousness" 
is  equivalent  to  the  phrase,  "  to  submit  themselves  unto  the  right- 
eousness of  God"  in  v.  3,  or  to  the  expression,  "  to  believe  as  the 
righteousness  of  faith  says"  in  v.  6  ;  or  to  the  phrases :  v.  14, 
niaievtiv  ov  tig  rjxoLOs.  v.  8,  Sia  lov  ^rj^uxog  rtjg  nianwg  v.  16, 
vnO'AOvetv  euayyfXiw,^ 

XVIII.  Nature  of  faith,— Accord'mg  to  John  3:  14  etc,  faith  in 
Christ  consists  in  a  confident  reception  of  the  promise  which  is  con- 
nected with  the  death  of  Christ,  a  looking  unio  him  who  was  lifted 
on  the  cross,  with  the  hope  of  eternal  life.  As  this  faith  is  a  reli- 
ance on  Christ,  or  on  God  and  the  promises  which  he  gave  in  refer- 
ence to  Christ  (Rom.  4:  17 — 24)  we  find  these  expressions  :  1  Tim. 
1:  16.  Rom.  10:  11,  niattvuv  tn  avKo  Heb.  10;  19,^  nuQQtiaia  elg 
trjv  e'lGodov  etc. 

XIX.  This  faith  must  be  in  Christ, — Rom.  3:  26,  o  fx  nlaiecog 
'itlGOv,  comp.  22.  Gal.  2:  16.  Phil.  3:  8  etc.  1  Tim.  1:  16.  Acts 
13:  38.  10:  43.  26:  18.  comp.  with  v.  15. 

XX.  This  faith  must  embrace  his  death, — John  3:  14 — 16. 
Rom.  3:  25,  faith  in  his  blood.  Gal.  2:  20.  Heb.  10:  19. 

XXI.  We  must  believe  in  God. — Rom.  4:  5,  believing  in  him 
who  justifies  the  ungodly  (in  God.)  v.  24,  in  him  who  raised  Jesus 
— who  was  delivered  for  our  offences  and  raised  for  our  justifica- 
tion. 5:  11,  we  joy  in  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  comp. 
V.  6  etc.  1  Pet.  1:  21. 

XXII.  We  must  be  impressed  ivith  a  deep  sense  of  God^s  love 
to  us. — 1  John  4:  16,  we  have  known  and  believed  the  love  that 
God  hath  to  us.  comp.  v.  9  etc.  Rom.  5:  1.  comp.  v.  5  etc.  See 
§115.111.7. 


SECTION   CXVIII. 


Faith  is  most  perfectly  adapted  to  the  scheme  of  mercy,  as  the  con- 
dition of  salvation. 
This  condition  of  our  actual  attainment  of  salvation  accords  in  the 

'  For  this  signification  of  tTri,   see  Opusc.   Acadeni,  Vol.  I.  p.  213.  Vol.  III. 
p.  9.3.  2  On  the  Object  of  the  Death  of  Christ,  p.  557. 

3  Ibid.  p.  430,  394. 


•5.118.]  SALVATION  BY  GRACE.  571 

most  perfect  manner  with  the  nature  and  circumstances  of  the  scheme 
by  which  it  was  provided.     For,  those  who  are  actually  justified 
[pardoned,]  owe  their  salvation,  not  to  their  own  merits,  but  to  the 
grace  of  God  who  provided  a  Redeemer  for  us,  and  to  the  merits  of 
Christ  our  Redeemer  (Rom.  3:  24.  <^  73.)     Justification  [pardon] 
by  faith,  therefore,  signifies  nothing  else  than  this,  that  a  Christian 
is  treated  as  if  he  were  righteous,  not,  in  any  sense,  on  account  of 
his  works,(l)  but  on  account  otthe  free  grace  of  God, (2)  who  gave 
us  a  Redeemer,(3)  or  for  Christ's  sake(4) — that  he  is  justified,  not 
because  he  is  entitled  to  salvation  as  a  reward,  or  because  he  has 
done  any  thing  which  would  give  him  a  claim  to  salvation  [not  as 
noinoa(;  Iv  oTg  uv&gconog  ^/Jfj^ra*,  Gal.  3:  12,]  not  as  an  ifjya^ofifvog, 
as  one  that  worketh  (Rom.  4:  4  ;)  but  he  is  justified  in  directly  the 
opposite  manner,(5)  that  is,  as  a   person  whose  works  give  him  no 
title  to  salvation.  (Not  by  the  law,  Gal.  3:  11.  Rom.  10:  4.  3:21. 
Gal.  3:  12.    Rom.   10:  5.    4:  5,  fi^  tgya^oiisvog.)     Having,  there- 
fore, no  claim  to  any   reward,  having  no  works  of  which  he  can 
boast(6)  or  on  which   he  can   depend,  he  has  no  other   refuge  left 
than  to  repose  his  confidence  in  another.(7)     He  must  put  his  trust 
in  him,  who  has  devised  a  scheme,  by  which  he  can  justify  those 
who  not  only  deserve  no  reward,  but  who  are  even  actually  guilty 
creatures,  by  which  he  can  accept  their  confidence  in  him  and  his 
wonderful  scheme  of  grace,(8)  instead  of  righteousness,  and  can, 
not  on  account  of  their  obedience,  but  in  consequence  of  their  confi- 
dence in  him  [not  lyi  vofiov  but  *>?  nlatewg  Rom.  10:  5.  Gal.  3:  11, 
12,]  bestow  a  salvation  on  them  to  which  those  only  are  entitled 
(9)  who  have  yielded  perfect  obedience  to  their  requisitions  of  his 
law.     In  short,  confidence  in  the  grace  of  God  and  in  the  merits  of 
Christ,  is  a  state  of  mind  which  perfectly  accords  with  the  nature 
and  circumstances  of  justification.    By  faith  [reliance  on  Christ]  we 
accept  an   undeserved   favour,  as  such,  that  is,  we  accept  it  as  an 
undeserved  favour.(lO) 

Illustrations. 

I.     Salvation  not  of  v;orks.-Rorn.  3:  28.  9=  /^    ^aU  2:  16 
Enh  2-8  9    (See  supra  ■^  73.)     From  these  and  other  passages 
oftripture%V  hav?  proved  L  the  work  On  the  Des.gn  of  the 


572  JUSTIFICATION.  [bK.  V. 

death  of  Christ  (p.  675,)  that  in  all  cases  in  which  "the  righteous- 
ness of  faith,"  di'Amoavvf]  Trjg  -nioTimg,  is  spoken  of,  "  faith,"  nlaiig 
is  not  represented  as  an  act  deserving  a  reward,  not  as  a  source  of  a 
personal  righteousness  or  internal  dignity,  but  rather  as  a  something 
which  God  has  resolved  to  accept  in  its  stead  ;  it  is  described  as  di- 
rectly the  opposite  of  self-dependence,  as  a  reliance  on  what  God 
has  done  without  our  agency. 

Paulus,  in  his  Theol.  Journal,  for  1796,  p.  221 — 227,  endeavours 
to  prove  that  "  the  righteousness  of  fliith,'"'  diauioovi/r]  trjg  nlarfcog^ 
signifies,  uprightness  before  God  and  the  acceptance  of  this  as  being 
a  sincere  desire  of  faith.  The  arguments  against  this  explanation 
are  found  in  the  work  referred  to  in  the  last  Illustration  (com p.  <§> 
117.  111.  7.)  The  same  arguments  also  milhate  against  the  explana- 
tion of  Stoltz,  wlio  explains  this  phrase  thus:  by  becoming  follow- 
ers of  Jesus,  by  embracing  his  doctrines,  and  making  proper  use  of 
them,  we  are  led  to  the  true  worship  of  God."* 

II.  Salvation  is  by  irrace. — Rom.  4:  16,  therefore  it  is  of  faith, 
that  it  might  be  of  grace.  Eph.  2:  8,  for  by  grace  ye  are  saved, 
through  faith  it  is  the  gift  of  God. 

III.  Gal.  2:  20,21,  "I  enjoy  salvation  by  reliance  on  the  Son 
of  God,  (not  on  my  works  3:  12)  who  delivered  me  from  the  pun- 
ishment which  my  conduct  brought  on  me.  I  do  not  frustrate  the 
grace  of  God,  by  the  opinion  that  my  own  deeds  could  authorize 
me  to  expect  to  be  treated  as  righteous."^ 

IV.  We  are  saved  fur  Christ's  sake.— Gal  2:  16,  17.  Acts  13: 
38  etc.  10:43. 

V.  It  is  a  strange  remark  of  Teller,  "  that  igyaC6f*£vog  is  used 
only  to  designate  low  and  servile  vrorks  (operis  operatis.")  This 
word,  on  the  contrary,  is  in  various  passages  of  the  New  Testament 
(such  as  John  .5:  17.  9:  4.  Rom.  2:  10.  Gal.  6:  10.  Heb.  11:  33) 
evidently  applied  to  deeds  of  moral  excellence.  But  in  Rom.  4, 
i(jyaC6ii£i>og  evidently  signifies  a  person  who  has  done  something 
which  merits  a  reward^  (^uoi9d*/ v.  4,)  and  |M?; /^/a^oV^^^'O?  desig- 
nates one  who  has  not  done  that  which  deserves  to  be  rewarded, 
but  who,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  guilty  person,  (a  delinquent,  a  debt- 
or,) ddfi^tjg.  "E^yov  work,  signifies  also  the  reward  of  an  action  ;'* 


1  ErlHuterungen  des  Neuens  Test.  Ill  Heft.  Aminerk.  zu  Rom.  3:  21—26 

2  The  Design  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  p.  456. 

3  Th«  presfnt  i^yatu/uevog  is  used  for  f()yaodfi£vog  as  in  Gal.  3:  5,  6  tni'/OQtjytT/y 
as  instead  of  J  i7TiyoQrjyj)aag,  Eph.  4:  28,  6  aXimojv  instead  of  6  nkiipag,  see  com- 
ment, on  Heb.  10:  25.  Note  q. 

4  Rev.  14:  13,  •'  their  works,  f '(>;'«.  shall  follow  them."  See  Schleusner's  Lex. 
N.  T.  p.  826.  No.  9.  Kypke,  on  James  1:  4,  proves  that  tQyov  signifies  also  fruit, 
profit,  wages,  as_  \yell  by  passages  from  Greek  authors  as  from  the  Old  Test, 
■where  the  word  Vyk  has  the  same  sienification. 


'S*  118.]  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH.  573 

and  hence  also  "  to  work-'  i()yaCta&ai  {-notfTv  tgyov^  iqyu^ta&ai 
igyov)  means,  "  to  acquire  a  reward  of  one's  work."  In  the  same 
sense  also  is  this  word  used  in  John  6:  27.  (to  work  out,  elaborate, 
procure)=nt;^*  Gen.  13:  1.^ 

VI.  Justification  by  faith,  leaves  us  noihinor  whereof  to  glory. — 
Rom.  4:  2,  he  (Abraham)  had  nothing  whereof  to  glory  before  God. 
3:  27,  where  then  is  boasting?  it  is  excluded — by  the  law  of  faith. 
Eph.  2:  9,  Not  of  works,  lest  any  man  should  boast. 

VII.  Though  faith  is  the  condition,  it  is  by  no  means  the  meri- 
torious cause  of  our  salvation. — Faith  is  so  clearly  distinguished 
from  meritorious  obedience  to  the  divine  law,  or  from  human  merit, 
in  many  passages  of  Scripture  (e.  g.  Gal.  3:  11  etc.  Rom.  10:  4 
etc.  4:  4 — 6,  16.  comp.  11:6.  Eph.  2:  8  etc.,)  that  it  cannot  be 
regarded  as  a  meritorious  cause  of  our  salvation.  Nor,  indeed  is  it 
possible,  however  excellent  and  noble  the  reliance  on  the  Redeemer 
sent  by  God  is  in  itself  (<^  119 — 121,)  that  it  should  pay  the  past 
debt  of  man.  The  excellence  of  this  reliance  cannot  make  man 
cease  to  be  a  debtor,  doe^rig.  Nor  has  this  confidence  in  the  Re- 
deemer so  high  an  intrinsic  value,  as  to  entitle  us  to  the  great  sal- 
vation which  is  promised  to  believers,  as  a  merited  reward.  Faith 
is  not  really  a  virtue  or  righteousness,  by  which  we  become  worthy 
of  so  great  a  salvation  ;.  but  it  is  merely  accounted  as  such  (through 
grace.  Rom.  4:  5,  24.  <§.  117.  8,)  the  subject  of  it  is  treated  as  if 
he  had  yielded  a  righteousness  which  would  entitle  him  to  so  great 
a  salvation  Gal.  5:  5.  «§>  117.  111.  9.)  It  is,  moreover,  very  evident, 
that  the  salvation  which  we  believe  we  shall  obtain,  must  exist 
previously  to  our  belief,  and  therefore  cannot  be  the  result  of  our 
belief;  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  this  faith  or  belief  must  depend  on 
the  reality  (the  anterior  existence)  of  that  in  which  we  do  believe. 
The  belief  of  the  pardon  of  our  sins  and  of  a  salvation  so  far  trans- 
cending all  merit,  cannot  be  the  belief  of  a  truth,  cannot  be  worthy 
of  notice,  if  the  object  of  our  belief  did  not  previously  exist,  and 
had  not  been  derived  from  some  other  source,  on  which  other  source^ 
the  promises  of  this  salvation  were  based.  Faith  in  the  promises  of 
God,  presupposes  the  truth  of  those  promises,  and  does  not  create 
it  by  first  believing  it.  '  u  i  t 

VIII.  The  condition  of  salvation  is,  that  we  should  believe. -- 
Rom.  10:  6—9,  if  thou  wilt  confess  the  Lord  Jesus— and  believe  in 
thine  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be 
saved  (not  Xgioiop  ayayeJv  ix  lov  ov(javov—U  tmv  vfxfjwv. 

IX  Gal  3-11  "  He  who  is  justified  by  God  on  account  oi  Ins 
faith  (in  the  unmerited  pardon  of  God,)  shall  be  saved"  (dUa^.J. 


.  Compare  Raphelii  Annot.  ex.  Herodot.  on  Matt.  25:  16;  and  the  work  on  the 
Desiijn  of  Christ's  death,  p.  245. 


574  JUSTIFICATION.  [bK.  V. 

Six(xi(f)&eig  naga  tm  d^eo}) — o  dixatog  fx  Tilaawg  Cvoitat.  On  this 
passagoi,  see  the  work  sup.  cit.  <§»  19,  p.  678,  where  it  is  remarked, 
that  these  words  of  Habakkuk  which,  according  to  Paul's  own  ex- 
planation (Heb.  10:  38,)  have  another  meaning,  are  not  adduced  in 
this  passage  as  evidence,  but  are  merely  used  as  a  known  and  con- 
venient expression,  to  designate  an  evangelical  doctrine. 

X.  Faith  is,  therefore,  the  acceptance  of  the  blessing  of  justifica- 
tion [pardon]  which  is  offered  to  all. 


BOOK   V. 

OF  A  CHANGE  OF  HEART  AND  REFORMATION  OF 
LIFE,  AND  THEIR  RELATION  TO  OUR  ATTAIN- 
MENT OF  SALVATION. 


PART    IL 


OF    THE    REFORMATION    OF    LIFE    CONNECTED    WITH    FAITH,    AND 
ITS    RELATIOxN'  TO  OUR    SALVATION. 


SECTION    CXIX. 


Of  the  change  of  heart  and  reformation  of  life  consequent  on  faith. 
But  the  wisdom  of  the  prescription  of  faith  or  a  reliance  on  the 
grace  of  God  and  merits  of  Christ  as  the  condition  of  salvation,  is 
not  evident  merely  from  the  circumstance  that  it  is  reasonable  in 
God  to  require  that  we  should  acknowledge  and  accept  the  bless- 
ings offered  in  the  Gospel  as  they  are  there  proposed.  There  is 
another  reason  which  evinces  the  same  truth. (1)  Faith  also  exerts 
a  highly  salutary  influence(2)  on  us,  in  producing(3)  a  change  of 
heart  and  reformation  of  life. (4)  There  can  be  no  faith  without  a 
knowledge(5)  of  that  which  we  are  to  believe,  and  an  assent  to  it. 
(6)  A  cold  indifferent  assent  in  matters  pertaining  to  our  salvation, 
and  so  closely  connected  with  our  highest  interests,  cannot  be  a  sin- 
cere and  proper  assent. (7)  A  genuine  faith  must  be  accompanied 
with  suitable  feelings  of  the  heart,(8)  feelings  which  correspond  to 
the  truths  which  are  the  object  of  our  faith. (9)  Those  who  have 
a  sincere  confidence  in  Christ,  and  are  convinced  that  they  shall 


576  REFORMATION.  [bK.   V. 

obtain  an  inconceivably  great  salvation  purely  through  the  grace  of 
God  and  Christ,  are  impressed  by  this  confidence  with  the  habitual 
conviction, (10)  that  to  be  a  slave  of  sin  is  beneath  the  dignity  of 
Christians,  who  are  destined  for  such  exalted  purposes,  and  that  a 
zealous  "following  after  holiness"  alone  comports  with  the  highness 
and  the  holiness  of  their  calling.(H)  This  confidence  [reliance,] 
therefore,  must(12)  inspire  them  with  gratitude,  love,  and  in  short 
with  every  disposition  toward  their  Benefactor(13)  which  is  required 
by  the  divine  law.  It  must  produce(14)  an  habitual  obedience  to 
God  and  Christ,  and  particularly  love  to  our  fellowmen,  whom  God 
and  Christ(15  loved  just  as  he  loved  us,  and  whom  he  requires  us 
to  love.  It  is  in  this  manner  that  divine  grace  and  a  reliance  on 
the  promises  of  God,  produce  a  change  of  mind  and  reformation  of 
conduct. (16) 


Illus 


fRATlOXS. 


I.  In  2  Pet.  1:  3,  we  are  told  that  through  a  knowledge  of  the 
merciful  and  gracious  God  and  Christ  (v.  2, 8,)  that  is,  through  faith 
(v.  1,  5,)  God  bestows  on  us,  not  only  what  is  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, but  also  what  is  necessary  to  godliness,  evaefiftai/;  and  that 
from  this  faith  proceed  all  the  various  christian  virtues,  v.  5 — 7.i 

II.  Acts  3:  26.  Rom.  6:  21.  7:  12.  8:  6,  to  be  spiritually  mind- 
ed, is  life  and  peace.  Tit.  3:  8. 

III.  How  this  change  of  heart  is  produced. — The  internal  mode 
of  the  new  birth  is  inexplicable  to  man.  Hence  Christ  could  ren- 
der it  intelligible  no  farther  (John  3: 1,8.  §  115.  111.  8)  than  by  say- 
ing that  this  change  is  effected  by  confidence  in  Christ,  v.  11 — 18. 

IV.  John  3:  3,  8.  He  that  puts  his  trust  in  Christ  (v.  15)  is  a 
child  of  God  (is  yeyiwrifAtvoq  uvu-dsv  v.  3,  7,  or  ly.  lou  (fiou  1  John 
5:  1,  4  etc.  Comp.  <5>  110)  and  an  heir  of  salvation.  Rom.  8:  13 — 
17.  He  has  a  certain  hope  of  being  admitted  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven — of  attaining  salvation.  John  3:  3,  5,1 5 — 17.  And  in  this  re- 
spect he  is  born  again,  dvayfytwri^itvog  1  Pet.  1:  3.  But  he  has  be- 
come more  like  unto  God  in  holiness  also  as  well  as  happiness^  (v.  14 


1  The  work  on  the  Design  of  the  dealh  of  Jesus,  p.  417,  683,  689,  415. 

2  To  this  subject  belong  the  texts  Matt.  5:  48,  be  ye  perfect  etc.  v.  45.  Eph.  5: 
1,  be  ye  followers  of  God  as  dear  children.  2  Pet.  1:  4,  that  ye  may  be  partakers 
of  the  divine  nature,  having  escaped  the  corruption  that  is  in  the  world.  See 
Noesselt's  Disputatio  de  vera  vi  nominis  filiorurn  Dei  ;  in  which  it  is  proved 
that  similarity  to  God  in  point  of  holiness  and  happiness,  is  the  cardinal  idea 
meant  by  "  sons  of  God"  in  the  New  Testament. 


<J   119.]  REFORMATION.  577 


16  ;)he  is  born  again  also  in  this  sense,  thj^t  his  heart  has  become  more 
pure,  V.  23,  22.  Heb.  12:  10.  In  accordance  with  this  view  of 
the  subject,  we  find  that  of  those  who  wished  to  enter  into  the  kintr- 
dom  of  heaven,  and  who  were  therefore  required  to  be  born  aga?n 
(John  3:  3,  5,  7,)  Jesus,  in  other  passages,  requires  a  change  of 
mind,  fifidpotav,  Man.  4:17.  11:20,21.  And  the  twelve  °also, 
whom  Christ  sent  forth  into  the  world  during  his  life  time,  in  like 
manner  connected  the  joyful  tidings  of  the  approaching  reign  of 
God  with  a  summons  to  repentance,  fieidvotav,  Matt.  10:  7.  Luke 
9:  6,  2.  In  the  parallel  passage  Mark  6:  12,  we  find  the  words 
ixijgvaaov  'ivu  fieiavoiiawot,  they  preached  that  they  should  repent. 
Paul  also  represents  regeneration,  nahyyivvioiav,  as  being  a  change, 
a  renewing  which  is  effected  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (<5>  115.111.  3,)  and 
by  which  the  Christian  becomes  another,  a  new  creature,  and  begins 
to  be  not  only  a  more  happy  but  also  more  holy  being.  Tit.  3:  5. 
In  2  Cor.  5:  17,^  we  are  told,  "  If  any  man  be  in  Christ,  he  is  a 
new  creature,"  that  is,  "  He  who  is  truly  united  to  Christ,  has  be- 
come a  new,  a  happy  {ol  ^uvxeg  v.  15,)  and  better  person  (he  no 
longer  Hves  unto  himself,  comp.  Rom.  12:  2.  Eph.  4:  23,)  and  is 
more  pleasing  to  Christ."^  If  we  have  that  faith  which  is  wrought 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  (<§>  115.  111.  7  ;)  if,  through  the  instrumentality 
of  the  divine  Spirit,  we  have  been  received  among  the  people  of 
God,  among  the  aylovg  saints,  or  those  dedicated  to  God,^  in  such  a 
manner  that  we  are  actually  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  happiness  des- 
tined for  Christians  in  this  life ;  if  we  have  been  sanctified  or  set 
apart  [J/mCfra*]  by  that  Spirit,  so  that  we  really  belong  to  the 
happy  people  of  God  ;*  if,  through  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit 
and  faith  in  the  Gospel,  we  have  actually  obtained  salvation  (bles- 
sedness 2  Thess.  2:  13  ;)  then  are  we  renewed  (Tit.  3:  5)  by  this 
faith  and  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  transformed  into  new  creatures, 
and  entitled  to  a  place  among  the  obedient  children  of  God.^  We 
are  also  sanctified  (or  set  apart,  comp.  1  Thess.  5:  23)  in  this  re- 
spect, that  we  strive  to  attain  a  degree  of  holiness^  worthy  of  God's 
people,  Eph.  5:  3,  27.  1  Pet.  1:  14—16.  Of  the  subjects  of  this 
change,  it  is  also  said,  that  they  are  turned  away^  from  evil  through 
the  instrumentality  of  faith,^  and  turned  [converted]  unto  God  and 


1  Comp.  Gal.  6:  15.     2  See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  the  Atonement,?.  513. 
3  §  99.  2  Thess.  2:  13.  Acts  20:  18.  4  §  71.  III.  2. 

5  1  Pet.  1-  2    2-  9      "  As  the  people  of  God,  ye  nre  under  obligation  daily  to 
magnify  the  riches  of  the  grace  of  God  by  your  works,  and  to  live  to  his  glory. 

6  1  Thess.  4:  3.  Rom.  6: 19.  2  Cor.  7:  1.  Heb.  12:  14. 

7  Acts  26:  18.  3:  26.  James  5:  19  etc. 

8  See  Eccles.  17:  25  etc.  where  iniorQi<ptiv  inl  yvgiovand  ar.Toi^Tie.i'  ujo^lac, 
inavccyuv  inl  vxpiarov  and  ^jtooxQiifBtv  hno  ^Sixiag,  are  connected  togetner. 

73 


578  CHANGE  OF  MIND.  [bK.  V. 

. ' .A 

Christ.  The  words  i7itGTgtq:6G{^ai  and  furuXoelv,  are  sometimes 
used  together,  and  at  others  interchanged.  The  meaning  of  the 
latter  word  is,  to  reform,  to  change  our  evil  dispositions,^  and  thus^ 
also  to  reform  our  mode  of  living.^ 

In  Acts  26:  20,  fAeidpocav=iniaTgiCffiv  im  top  {tiov.  3:  19,  ^8- 
xavoHt/=^tniaiQt(fetv.  11:  18,  f.t6tavoca=i7itaigoqri  in  15:  3.  Thus 
also  in  Job  36:  10,  Symmachus  translates  the  Heb.  llNtt  'j^niiij  by 
fisiaporjawai,,  and  the  LXX  by  intazgagi^oovTai  i'§  aSiyilag.  That 
fxeiavoilv  signifies,  to  reform,  to  come  to  reflection,  is  clear  from  the 
subsequent  passages.  Luke  15:  7,  10,  17.  5:  32.  Rom.  2:  4.  Acts 
17:  30.  Wisdom  of  Solomon  11:  24.  Ecclus.  44:  16. 

V.  Knowledge  necessary  to  faith. — Rom.  10:  14,  how  shall  they 
believe  in  him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard  ?  Eph.  1:  13.  Matt. 
13:  19. 

VI.  1  Thess.  2:  13,  ye  have  received  the  word  of  God  which  ye 
heard  of  us.  Heb.  4:  2. 

VII.  Faith  without  ivories  is  dead. — James  2:  14,17,20 — 26. 
2  Pet.  1 :  6,  9,  "  He  whose  knowledge  of  Christ  is  unfruitful  [does 
not  produce  the  virtues  mentioned  v.  5 — 7]  is  not  possessed  of  the 
genuine  knowledge  of  Christ.  He  does  not  view  the  great  blessing 
of  pardon  for  Christ's  sake,  in  the  proper  light,  or  he  has  forgotten 
it."4 

VIII.  Proper  feelings  of  the  heart  necessary  to  true  faith. — 
Rom.  5:  5.  2  Cor.  5:  14,  "  The  love  which  Christ  evinced  toward 
all  men  by  his  death,  hath  taken  entire  possession  of  me  [constrain- 
€th  me."J^ 

IX.  2  Cor.  5:  15.  Rom.  5:  6.  Compare  III.  8. 

X.  2  Cor.  5:  15.  The  conviction  of  the  Christian,  that  he  has 
died  with  Christ  and  shall  live  [enjoy  salvation]  with  him  in  another 
world,  must  produce  an  indifference  in  him  to  worldly  objects  and 
worldly  advantages  [ivcc  fiijy.e'ii  iaviM  C^}-^]  Heb.  9:  14. 

XI.  Eph.  2:  4—10.  Col.  3:  1—8,'  if  ye  are  risen  with  Christ, 
seek  those  things  which  are  above — set  your  afl?ections  on  things 
above  and  not  on  things  on  the  earth.  Rom.  6:  11 — 13.  Tit.  2: 
11—14.   1  Pet.  1:3,  14—16.-7 

XII.  Philem.  5:  6,  "  I  have  heard  of  your  love  to  Jesus  and 
your  faith  in  him,  which  tend  to  promote  the  welfare  of  all  Chris- 
tians;  so  that  your  grateful  recollection  of  the  blessings  of  Christ 


'1  Acts  8:  ^.     Wisdom  of  Solomon  12:  10, 19. 

2  Matt.  7:  16— '20.  12:  33—35. 

3  Acts  26:  20.  Luke  3:  8—14.  Heb.  6:  1. 

4  On  the  Design  of  the  Atonement,  p.  389.  5  Ibid.  p.  409. 
•6  Ibid.  p.  510,  413.  and  Comment,  on  Heb.  9:  14. 

^  On  the  Deaign  of  Christ's  death,  p.  .383,  411,  521 . 


»§>  120.]  REPENTANCE  AND  CONVERSION.  67^ 


has  produced  an  active  benevolence  toward  him  (or  toward  his 
worshippers"  v.  l.y  Gal.  5:  6,  faith  worketh  by  love.  In  the  work 
on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  (p.  386,  390,)  an  explanation 
is  given  of  the  manner  in  which  faith  in  the  doctrine  of  a  gracious 
remission  of  sins,  produces  love  and  gratitude  to  God  and  Jesus,  and 
thus  promotes  christian  virtue.^ 

XIII.  Luke  7:  42,  47,  her  sins  which  are  many,  are  forgiven  ; 
for  she  loved  much  ;  but  to  whom  little  is  forgiven,  the  same  loveth 
little.   1  John  4:  19.  v.  16,  9.  Heb.  12:  28.  8:  11, 12. 

XVI.  1  John  4:9—11.  John  15:  12—14.  Eph.  5:  2.  Phil.  2: 
4—8.  Rom.  14:  15. 

XV.  1  John  5:  3,  this  is  the  love  of  God,  that  we  keep  his  com- 
mandments. John  15:  14,  ye  are  my  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever 
I  command  you.  Heb.  8:  10,  11  etc. 

XVI.  Rom.  12:  1,  2 compared  with  3:  21—11:  32.  2  Pet.  1:4, 
"  God,  according  to  his  glorious  grace,  hath  given  us  great  promises, 
in  order  that  ye  may  continue  to  become  more  like  unto  him  (con- 
tinue to  become  more  holy  as  he  is  holy.") 


SECTION    CXX. 


Genuine  sorrow  for  sin,  and  its  connexion  loith  faith  and  refor- 
mation. 
The  origin  of  genuine  faith  is  also  accompanied  by  sorrow  for  sin, 
(1)  that  is  a  knowledge  of  our  sinful  state,(2)  accompanied  by  pain- 
ful feelings. (3)  This  penitence  produces  an  aversion  to  sin,  and  a 
desire  for  holiness  (2  Cor.  7:  11,)  and  thus,  if  faith  be  combined 
with  it,  promotes  a  salutary  change  of  mind  and  reformation  of  hfe, 
fi€Tapoicxv.{^)  And  faith,  or  reliance  on  God  and  Christ,(5)  will 
alike  prevent  a  despair  of  attaining  salvation,(6)  and  excite  our  zeal 
in  the  conflict  with  sin. (7) 

Illustrations. 

I.    Repentance  and  conversion.— It  is  indeed  true,  that  the  word 
fietavoia  change  of  mind,  does  signify  sorrow,  fisrafiiXeta,  (which 


1  Dissert.  II.  in  Ep.  ad  Col.  et  Philem.  Note  115, 123.    Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  XL 
p.  223—227. 

2  See  Reinhard's  Moral,  B.  II.  S.  177. 


580  CHANGE  OF  MIND.  [bK.  V. 

meaning  Michaelis  prefers,^)  not  only  in  pure  Greek,^  but  also  in 
Hebraistic  Greek.  Examples  of  this  are  found  in  Ecclesiasticus  17: 
24  ;  in  Wisdom  of  Solomon  5:  3 ;  in  the  version  of  the  LXX,  who 
frequently  render  the  word  orr:  by  (Aexuvoilv ;  and  even  in  the  New 
Testament  itself,  e.  g.  Luke  17:  4.  But  when  this  salutary  change 
in  man  is  spoken  of,  /u^raf  om  embraces  the  entire  change,  including 
its  two  constituents,  sorrow  for  sin,  and  faith,  and  not  sorrow  [Xvnriv) 
alone.  Thus  in  Luke  15:  7,  10,  this  word  evidently  indicates  the 
entire  change  of  the  sinner  ;^  and  the  essential  parts  of  this  change 
are,  in  the  parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  represented  as  consisting  in 
sorrow  (v.  17 — 19,)  and  faith  or  confident  reliance  on  his  father  (v. 
18,  20.^*)  On  the  contrary,  natavota  change  of  mind,  is  represent- 
ed as  the  consequence  of  Ivnri  sorrow,  penitence,  in  1  Cor.  7:  9, 
10.  Acts  2:  37,  38.  But,  that  penitence  or  sorrow,  fieiccfiilfta, 
constitutes  a  part  of  the  entire  change  of  mind,  ^siavova^  is  evident 
from  the  expression  '*  for  godly  sorrow  w^orketh  a  salutary  reforma- 
tion never  to  be  repented  of,"  fifiai/oia  fig  acDirjQiav  ctfiBTa^t^rjiog, 
which  is  used  in  2  Cor.  7:  10,  in  specific  reference  to  the  fact  that 
penitence  or  sorrow  is  included  in  the  entire  change  or  reformation. 
Thus  also  the  change  of  mind,  ^isicifoia,  which  John  the  Baptist 
required  Matt.  3:  2,  11,  or  that  change  from  which  a  different  mode 
of  thinking  and  acting  should  result,  was  at  least  connected  with  a 
knowledge  of  our  sins.  v.  8,  10,  6.  The  command  of  our  Saviour, 
"  fifiavoflie^^  Mark  1:  15,  requires  an  entire  change  of  mind,  like 
that  which  John  the  Baptist  taught.  For,  the  supplementary  phrase, 
"  believe  in  the  Gospel,"  is  not  used  for  the  purpose  of  showing 
that  fAfiavota  does  not  include  faith  ;  its  object  is,  to  call  our  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  this  fiezdvota  change  of  mind  is  produced  through 
the  instrumentality  of  the  Gospel,  or  by  faith  in  the  doctrines  of 
Christ  (>§.  121.)  In  the  parallel  passage.  Matt.  4:  17,  this  word  is 
used  alone,  because  it  properly  signifies,  not  merely  sorrow  for  sin, 
but  an  entire  change  of  mind.  The  reason  why  "  repentance  to- 
wards God"  and  "  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  are  distinguished 
and  mentioned  separately  in  Acts  20:  21,  was,  the  design  of  the 
apostle  to  describe  this  change  with  a  peculiar  reference  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles  (1  Thess.  1:  9,  10.)  In  gentile  subjects  of  conversion,  the 
most  striking  feature  of  the  change  was  found  in  their  views  con- 
cerning God ;  for,  having  been  idolaters  before,  they  had  never 
properly  known  and  worshipped  him.  Acts  14:  15.  15:  19.  On 
the  other  hand,  when  a  Jew  was  converted,  the  most  prominent 
part  of  his  change  referred  to  his  views  o(  Jesus,  and  consisted  in 
his  conviction  that  he  was  Christ  the  Lord.^ 


«  Dogmatik  §  148.         2  Schlcusner'sLex.  N.  Test.  T.  If.  p.  113.  No.  1. 
3  §  119.  111.  4.  4  On  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  394. 

-5  Dissert,  in  Ep.  ad  Philem.  Note  115. 


'^  120.]  SORROW  FOR  SIN.  581 

II.  The  knowledge  of  our  sinful  state,  with  which  our  salutary 
change  must  commence,^  consists  in  a  conviction  that  we  are  guilty* 
miserable  creatures,  and  in  a  just  acquaintance  with  our  own  situa- 
tion, which  must  necessarily  be  connected  with  mournful  and  pain- 
ful feelings.3  Luke  18:  13.  Ps.  51:  19.  Jer.  31:  19.  James  4:  9. 
But  as  we  are  to  be  saved,  not  by  any  merit  of  our  own,  but  on  ac- 
count of  the  sufferings  of  the  Redeemer,  this  sorrow  for  sin  could 
not  be  necessary  for  its  own  sake,'*  or  for  the  purpose  that  man 
might  be  punished  at  least  with  the  painful  sense  of  his  sins,  and 
thus  make  some  satisfaction  for  them.  But  it  is  the  unavoidable 
consequence  of  an  accurate  knowledge  of  ourselves,  which  is  essen- 
tially necessary  to  the  existence  of  a  true  conversion,  of  joy  for  par- 
doned sin  (James  4:  10,)  and  of  a  genuine  and  salutary  faith  (Rom. 
4:  5—9.)  In  the  passages  1  John  1:  8  etc.  Jer.  2:  35.  3:  13.  Ps. 
32:  5.  51:  5  etc,  the  proposition  is  plainly  taught,  that  those  only 
who  are  conscious  of  their  sins,  can  obtain  pardon.  From  these 
considerations  it  is  evident,  that  no  general  standard  can  be  settled 
which  shall  be  applicable  to  every  individual,  either  for  the  exact 
measure  to  which  his  sorrow  for  sin  must  rise,  or  for  the  degree  in 
which  those  painful  feelings  must  be  outwardly  manifested.  The 
penitential  sorrow  of  different  individuals  may  be  genuine,  though 
there  may  be  a  diversity,  both  in  the  degree  of  the  feelings  them- 
selves, and  in  the  manner  of  manifesting  them  ;  provided,  their 
sorrow  be  the  result  of  sincere  and  earnest  conviction  of  their  sins, 
and  detestation  of  them. 

III.  This  conviction  of  sin  and  sorrow  for  it,  are  essentially  ne- 
cessary. Gal.  3:  24.  Luke  18:  13.  25:  17—20.  If,  like  the  Phari- 
see of  old  (Luke  18:  11,9,)  we  depend  on  our  own  morality  {Idiav 
diaatoovvtiv  Rom.  10:  3.,)  and  consequently  do  not  acknowledge 
our  guilt,  and  the  righteousness  appointed  by  God  'f  we  reject  the 
doctrine  of  the  free  grace  [pardon]  of  God,*^  and  therefore  shall  not 
obtain  the  pardon  of  our  sins.*^     It  is  a  just  sense  of  his  guilt  and 

1  Eph.  5:  13,  "  He^who  will  suffer  himself  to  be  reproved  by  the  light  [to  be 
brought  to  a  knowledge  and  abhorrence  of  his  sins,  through  the  admonitions  and 
example  of  Christians.] thereby  comes  forth  out  of  his  former  darkness  (in  which 
he  neither  knew  nor  felt  his  misery.)  Hence,  a  certain  hymn  savs  ;  Jt  you 
will  suffer  yourselves  to  be  awakened  from  the  slumber  of  your  indifTerence,  and 
delivered  from  your  unhappy  condition,  Christ  will  daily  make  you  better  and 
happier."  2  Luke  15:  18,  21.  Jer.  14:  20.  Dan.  9:  5. 

3  Luke  15:  17,  24,  32,  my  son  was  dead— was  lost.  Rom.  8:  6—8.  James  4:9, 
raXttinoiOTjaars  '•  Learn  to  see  your  great  misery." 

4  2  Cor.  7:  9,  now  1  rejoice,  not  that  ye  were  made  sorrowful,  but  that  ye  sor- 
rowed unto  reformation.  0.1.  1.        *u 

5  Rom.  10:  3,  being  ignorant  of  God's  righteousness.  See  the  work  on  the 
Design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  554.  ,  .       . 

6  Rom.  10:  3,  TvScxacoa^JpT]  rov  d,ov  oH  vittriytioav.  Atxiuoavv^^iva.yyi^ 
hov,  V.  16  {Xoyog  Laioovvrjs)  Dissert,  do  sensu  voc.s  SiTtaco,,  note  95. 

7  Luke  18:  14. 


582  CHANGE  OF  MIND.  [bK.  V. 

misery,  which  awakens  in  man  the  desire  for  the  divine  favour : 
"  The  publican  standing  afar  off,  would  not  lift  up  so  much  as  his 
eyes  unto  heaven,  but  smote  upon  his  breast  saying,  God  be  merci- 
ful to  me  a  sinner."\  The  law,  from  which  we  derive  a  knowledge 
of  sin  (Rom.  3.  20,)  and  the  knowledgeof  sin  itself,  lead  us  to  Christ. 
And  the  sinner  finding  that  he  cannot  depend  upon  his  own  merits, 
now  gladly  accepts  salvation^  through  faith  (reliance  on  Jesus,)  and 
having  thus  learned  the  great  value  of  the  doctrine  of  salvation 
through  grace,  he  embraces  it  in  the  most  conscientious  manner,  and 
frames  his  life  according  to  its  dictates.  And  a  renewal  of  those 
painful  feelings  in  the  various  stages  of  the  christian  course,  has  a 
tendency  to  preserve^  and  exalt  our  faith,  and  the  grateful  recollec- 
tion of  the  free  and  gracious  mercy  of  God.  Acts  9:  9,  11,  19. 
Thus  Paul's  gratitude  to  God  and  Christ  is  renewed  in  the  most 
lively  manner,  by  the  recollection  of  his  former  unworthiness.  It  is 
this  recollection  of  the  past  days  of  his  hfe,  which  explains  the  ar- 
dour of  feeling  which  he  displays  when  speaking  of  the  pardon  of 
the  sinner  for  Christ's  sake,  and  of  his  office  as  messenger  of  this 
salvation.  1  Tim.  1:  12—16.  1  Cor.  15:  8— -IS.^ 

IV.  Godly  sorrow  worketh  reformation.  Luke  15:  17 — 19.  comp. 
V.  7:  10.  2  Cor.  7:9,  10. 

V.  The  prodigal  son  applies  with  confidence  to  his  father,  Luke 
15:  18—20. 

Vr.  A  sorrow  for  sin  which  is  accompanied  by  a  despair  of  sal- 
vation, has  a  prejudicial  influence  ;  for  a  despair  of  success  will  nat- 
urally destroy  all  courage  to  attempt  a  reformation,  as  we  see  in  the 
example  of  Judas,  Matt.  27:  4.^  And  the  false  impression,  that 
even  those  who  entertain  a  reverence  for  God  nevertheless  cannot 
regain  his  favour,  sometimes  degenerates  into  the  most  criminal 
levity  and  neglect  of  every  duty.^ 

VII.  Rom.  6:  2,  6,  11.  1  Pet.  3:  21.  4:  2.  Compare  ^111. 


SECTION  CXXI. 


Connexion  between  obedience  to  the  commands  of  Christ,  and  a  re- 
liance  on  his  merits. 

Finally,  our  reliance  on  the  merits  of  Christ  (John  3:  14 — 16) 
as  the  ground  ojf  our  justification  [pardon,]  is  founded(l)  on  a  be- 

1  Luke  18:  13. 15:  17—26. 

9  Gal.   3:  24,  diiiaiojd'iufcsv^i.i^TOiuev  Stttatoj&TJvac  2:  17.  5:  4.  Diss.  sup.  cit. 
Note  111.  3  2  Pet.  1:9.  §119.111.7. 

4  Dissert,  de  censu  histor.  p.  4  etc.      5  Melancthonis  Loc.tbeol.  p.  498—500. 
6  Psalm  130:  4.     See  the  work  on  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  570. 


*§*    121.]  OBEDIENCE  CONNECTED  WITH  FAITH. 


593 


lief  in  his  divine  authority  (v.  11, 13)  and  in  the  divine  attributes  ;(2) 
in  short,  it  is  based  upon  a  faith  which  is  most  intimately  connected 
with  a  desire  for  hohness,  a  "  carefulness  to  maintain  good  works" 
(Tit.  3:  8.)  For,  this  faith  is  necessarily  connected  with  obedience 
(3)  to  all  the  instructions  of  Christ  or  to  the  gospel  taken  in  its  wi- 
dest sense. (4)  It  is  connected  with  obedience  not  only  to  the  glad 
tidings  of  the  pardon  of  our  sins  and  the  consequent  salvation  (the 
Gospel  in  its  more  confined  latitude) (5,)  but  involves  also  obedience 
to  the  law  of  Christ. (6) 

Illustrations. 

I.  No  one  can  receive  the  instructions  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles 
in  reference  to  the  design  of  the  Saviour's  death,  With  entire  sincer- 
ity of  heart,  who  does  not  receive  Jesus  and  his  apostles  as  divine 
messengers,  and  has  not  entire  confidence  in  the  veracity  of  God 
(<§>  6.  111.  10.)  (<§>  27  ;)  nay,  who  does  not  believe  the  supreme  dig- 
nity of  the  person  of  Jesus.  And  every  one  who  entertains  these 
high  ideas  of  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ,  must  also  necessarily  at- 
tribute divine  authority  to  all  his  doctrines  and  also  to  those  taught 
by  his  apostles.     <§»  82.  lllust.  7. 

II.  Faith  in  Christ  implies  a  belief  in  the  divine  attributes.  Rom. 
4:  20  compared  with  23.  These  passages  refer  to  faith  in  the  di- 
vine promises  ;  and  1  John  5:  10,  to  a  belief  in  the  veracity  of  God. 
In  Acts  16:  34  compared  with  v.  31,  ''  to  believe  in  Christ"  is 
interchanged  with  the  phrase,  "  to  believe  in  God." 

III.  Every  individual  who  sincerely  believes  in  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  does,  even  by  this  belief,  glorify  God.  Thus  Abraham,  as 
he  "  staggered  not  (at  the  promise  of  God)  through  unbelief,  but 
was  strong  in  faith,  gave  glory  to  God  ;"^  and  John  tells  us,  "  he 
that  receives  his  testimony,  hath  set  his  seal  that  God  is  true."^ 
For,  it  is  his  reverence  for  the  infallibility  and  other  attributes  of  God 
(e.  g.  power  Rom.  4:  21)  on  which  the  divine  veracity  and  immu- 
tability are  founded  («§>  26.)  which  induces  him  to  give  his  assent  to 
the  divine  doctrines  of  Christ  and  his  apostles.  And  as  it  is  the 
duty  of  those  to  whom  the  doctrines  of  Christ  are  published,  to 
glorify  God  by  faith  in  these  doctrines,  and  as  these  doctrines  ex- 
pressly require  men  thus  to  glorify  God,^it  is  evident  that  this  belief, 
by  virtue  of  which  we  do  not  resist  these  doctrines,^but  yield  obedience 


I 


1  Rom.  4:  20.  2  John  3:  33.  1  John  5:  10. 

3  John  8:  42—47.  10:  24-27.  15:  22—24.  1  John  3:23. 
<  Rom.  10:  21.  Acts  13:45.  Heb.  12:  25. 


584  FAITH.  [eK.  V. 


to  them,  is  itself  an  obedience  to  the  will  and  instructions  of  God.^ 
But  if  we  cordially  acquiesce  in  those  doctrines  which  refer  to  our- 
selves, our  acquiescence  cannot  be  a  mere  cold,  indifierent  assent 
(<§>  119.)  Some  of  the  doctrines  announce  joyful  events  and  prom- 
ises, whilst  others  present  to  our  view  a  picture  of  our  lamentable 
condition  and  warn  us  of  the  punishment  awaiting  the  transgressor. 
Some  enjoin  d-uties,  and  others  forbid  their  neglect.  Hence  the 
eftect  of  a  cordial  reception  of  these  divine  instructions,  must  neces- 
sarily be  a  diversity  of  feelings  corresponding  to  the  various  nature 
of  the  doctrines  themselves,  it  must  naturally  produce  joy.  cheer- 
fulness, hope,  gratitude,  {§  118,)  penitence  {§  120.  111.  2,j  fear,  a 
sense  of  moral  obligation.  2  Cor.  5:  10  etc.  Heb.  12:  28.  v.  29, 
J^aT()fV(i)ufv  rw  i9fq7  f.UTa  aidovgxai  evXa^ilag — ''  the  christian  feel- 
ing of  reverence  for  God,  aldMg,  must  sometimes  be  supported  by 
the  fear  of  punishment,  even  in  the  friends  of  Jesus."  Heb.  ]  1;  1. 
"  Faith  is  a  belief  in  the  existence  of  things  which  we  do  not  see," 
ov  ^XiTiofiev^  partly  of  future  events  which  we  hope  or  fear,  partly 
of  things  actually  existing  which  we  do  not  see,  and  partly  of  events 
which  -are  pa«t. 

IV.  The  term  ^vayyt'Xtov  or  "  Gospel"  is  used  in  its  more  ex- 
tewded  sense  in  the  following  passages:  1  Tim.  1:  10  etc.  Rom.  2: 

16.  1  Pet.  4:  17.  Matt.  4:  23.  comp.  v.  17.  Luke  3:  18.  comp.  v. 
7  etc.  20:  I.  Acts  15:  35.   14:  15.   17:  28.   1  Cor.  15:  1—11. 

V.  In  its  more  confined  sense  the  word  ivayytXiov  is  used  in  Rom. 
10:  16  comp.  v.3— 15.  9:31.  1:  16,17.  3:  21  etc.  As  "  Gospel," 
in  this  sense  of  the  word,  signifies  the  doctrine  concerning  the  un- 
merited grace  of  God  through  Christ,  in  which  we  may  justly  re- 
pose our  confidence,  in  other  words,  the  doctrine  of  "  the  right- 
eousness of  God  by  faith"  (dtyMioavvt]  -Oeov  in  Tilozfwg  10:  3,  6.  1: 

17.  3:  21  etc  ;)  the  doctrine  which  requires  us  to  rely,  not  on  our 
own  works,  but  on  the  merits  of  Christ,  which  requires^  faith  Tr/artj/, 
in  that  sense  in  which  the  word  is  used  Gal.  2: 16 — 3:  22.  (<§>  118;) 
therefore,  this  Gospel  may  also  be  called  "  the  doctrine  concerning 
faith  in  Christ,"  {^rjfia  Trig  niaztcog  Rom.  10:  8)  or  "faith"  itself 
()it(jng  Gal.  3:  23.  Comp.  <§>  117.  111.  16,)  or  '•'  faith  in  the  blood 
of  Jesus"  [jilaiig  Iv  xm  aljuaii'Jrjaov  Rom.  3:  25.)  And  this  name 
(nhiig  or  faith)  was  by  synecdoche  applied  to  the  whole  doctrine, 
that  is,  to  the  Gospel  in  its  most  extended  sense,  of  which  the  doc- 


1  Rom.  1:  5,  vTtanorj  niarso}?.  Comp.  Acts.  6:  7.  vm^tcovov  rjj  nlaret.  Heb.  2: 1, 
mrQoatysip  to7s  dxova&siat— the  opposite  is  fiTJLTtorayijvac.  ovx  vnaxovstv.  Rom. 
10:  3, 16. 

2  Rom.  1:  17,  "  Justification  before  God  through  faith  in  Christ  is  published 
in  the  Gospel,  in  order  that  this  faith  [reliance]  in  Christ  may  be  produced." 
tignioTtv,  see  Diss.  Ae  sensu  vocis  dittaiog,  Note  68.  Hermann's  Erklaerung  des 
N.  T.  Th.  VII.S.50. 


*§>  121.]  FAITH.  585 


trine  of  "  faith"  or  reliance  on  the  merits  of  Christ  is  a  part,  as  e. 
g.  in  Acts  6:  7.  Rom.  1:  5.  Jude  v.  3,  20.  And,  in  truth,  it  is  not 
only  that  part  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ  which  teaches  reliance  on 
his  merits,  but^  his^  entire  doctrines,  which  are  the  joyful  tidings 
^vayytliov,  inalov  ^^fia  Heb.  6.  5.  For  all  his  doctrines  have  a 
reference  to  our  salvation,^  even  the  commands  themselves,  and  the 
menaces  which  are  intended  to  deter  us  from  sin.  Heb.  4:  1.  And 
even  ifnlaicg  faith,  is  used,  not  in  its  more  limited,  but  in  its  widest 
sense,  as  having  a  reference  to  all  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  it  may 
still,  according  to  a  very  common  metonymy,  signify  the  entire 
doctrines  of  Christ.  For  "  Gospel,"  in  its  more  extended  sense, 
signifies  the  doctrines  which  we  are  under  obligation  to  receive  with 
approbation,  to  believe,  which  are  the  object  of  our  faith  or  assent. 
VI.  True  faith  is  uniformly  productive  of  obedience  to  the  di- 
vine laiv. — By  the  "  law  of  Christ"  {yo^og  Xgcatov  Gal.  6:  2.  corap. 
1  Cor.  9:  21)  is  meant  the  precepts  of  Christ  in  reference  to  our 
duty.^  The  greater  part  of  our  duties  are  indeed  taught  in  the  Old 
Testament,  and  maybe  known  even  from  reason.^  "  I  came  not 
(says  our  Lord)  to  destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets,  but  to  fulfil. ""* 
Still  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  apply  the  ancient  precepts  to  new 
objects,  which  had  previously  been  unknown,  and  which  were  intro- 
duced by  Christianity.  Of  this  kind  are  the  precepts  which  relate 
to  the  worship  of  Christ  (>§>  42  etc,)  and  to  the  duties  of  the  church 
and  her  members  (<§>  105—107.)  These  are  indeed  embraced  in 
those  moral  precepts  which  enjoin  the  worship  of  God,  and  the 
relative  duties  of  the  members  of  the  social  compact  in  general. 
But  they  are  placed  in  a  new  light  by  the  doctrine  concerning 
Christ,  and  the  nature  and  constitution  of  the  christian  church. 
Some  of  the  precepts  of  Christ,  moreover,  are  entirely  new  and 
peculiar.^  Now  all  these  laws  of  Christ  constitute  a  legal  code,  the 
prescriptions  of  which  we  can  and  ought  to  obey.^  The  salvation 
which  is  promised  us  by  the  doctrines  of  Christ  is  indeed  of  so  ex- 
alted a  nature  and  degree,  that  we  could  never  expect  to  merit  it  by 
our  works  (^  73,  118.)  Still,  after  it  had  been  resolved  upon  that 
this  salvation  should  be  offered  to  guilty  and  imperfect  man,  the  law 
{%  67,  72)  was  given  and  published  for   a  two-fold  purpose ;  in 


1  1  Cor.  15:  2,  "  the  Gospel  by  which  ye  are  saved,"  Eph.  1:  13,  "  tho  Gospel 
of  salvation."     Heb.  2:  3.  4:  2. 

2  John  15:  10,  12,  14.  Matt.  5:  22.  7.  23:  1  John  2:  3-5. 

3  Rom.  2:  12-15.  1:  19-32.  Phil.  4:  8. 

4  Matt.  5:  17-19.  Luke  10:  25-28.  Gal.  5:  13-22.  1  Tim.  1:  8-11. 

5  See  &  109,113.  Compare  Reuss'  Elementa  Theologiae  moralis.  p.  IjJO  etc. 

6  Matt.  5:  19.  7:  24.  Luke  10:  28.  John  14:  21,23.  15:   \^%^^- ^f^^^^ 
1  John  1:  5.  2:  3-6.  3:  6-10,  22.  5: 2.  Heb.  10:  36.  James  2:  22-25.  2.  8  etc. 

74 


586  FAITH.  [be.  V. 

order  that  those  who  reject  the  doctrines  of  Christ,^  and  habitually 
refuse  to  obey  his  precepts,^  may  forfeit  the  offered  salvation,  and 
receive  the  punishment  due  to  their  iniquity ;  and  that  even  those 
who  obey  the  doctrines  of  Jesus,  should  partake  of  the  salvation 
graciously  bestowed  on  them,  in  a  degree  proportionate  to  the  meas- 
ure of  their  faithfulness  and  obedience.  That  the  degree  of  their 
future  happiness  might  be  commensurate  with  the  measure  of  their 
exertions  to  conform  their  lives  to  the  standard  of  holiness  proposed 
in  the  Gospel,  a  standard  which  indeed  no  Christian,  not  even  the 
most  exalted,  can  ever  perfectly  attain.  The  law  itself  therefore, 
the  requisition  that  we  should  never  cease  conscientiously  to  learn 
from  our  meek  and  lowly  Teacher  (Matt.  11:  29  etc,)  who  well 
knew  our  infirmities,^  that  we  should  unceasingly  follow  after  holi- 
ness (Matt.  5:  6.)  and  gradually  press  forward  tovi^ard  the  mark  of 
christian  perfection  set  before  us,^  cannot  be  regarded  as  unjust,  or 
as  being  not  suited  to  the  infirmities  of  human  nature.  But  in  a 
very  different  point  of  view  is  the  law  considered,  when  it  is  said 
that  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  (or  put  an  end  to  it,  Rom.  10:  4. 
^  114.  111.  9,)  and  that  Christians  "  are  not  under  the  law,"  "  are 
freed  from  the  law."  Rom.  6:  14.  7:  1—6.  Gal.  2:  19.  5:  18.  We 
do,  indeed,  freely  concede  that  in  these  passages  the  term  "  law" 
does  not  signify  merely  the  ceremonial  lawsof  Moses,  which  of  course 
are  not  obligatory  on  Christians  (John  4:  21.  <§>  93,)  nor  the  civil  code 
of  the  Jewish  legislator,  which  was  neither  applicable  to  other  na- 
tions nor  enjoined  on  them.^  It  is  evident  from  the  context  (Rom. 
7:  7  etc.)  that  the  moral  part  of  the  law,  which  Christianity  incul- 
cates no  less  than  the  Mosaic  system  does,^  is  meant  in  these  passa- 
ges (<§)  73.  111.  3.)  But  it  must  be  remembered  that,  in  the  texts 
referred  to,  the  law  is  not  spoken  of  as  a  rule  of  life  for  persons  who 
rely  on  the  grace  of  God,  and  who  are  authorized  to  expect  a  sal- 
vation not  to  be  purchased  by  their  works  ;  but  is  regarded  as  a  law 
according  to  which  rewards  and  punishments  should  be  adjudged  in 
so  rigid  and  inexorable  a  manner,  as  to  exclude  all  grace  (Gal.  2: 
31.  3:  10,)  and   all  reliance  on  grace.     Gal.  3:  12.  Rom.  4:  14. 

1  John  3:  18,  36.  2  Thess.  1:  8.  Acts  13:  46.  Mark  16:  16.  Heb.  2:  1—3.  10:  26 
—31,  38. 

2  Matt.  7:  21.  13:  41.  Rom.  8:  13,6,  7.  Gal.  5:  19—21.  1  Cor.  6:  9  etc.  1  Pet. 
1:14—17.  Heb.  12:  14. 

3  Matt.  17:  17.  26:  41.  Conip.  §  85. 

4  Phil.  3:  12 — 15,  "  I  count  not  myself  to  have  apprehended — this  one  thing  I 
do — I  press  toward  tlie  mark,  for  the  prize  of  the  hi^^h  callinjr  of  God  in  Christ 
Jesus."  2  Cor.  7:  1,  "  Let  us  follow  after  holiness  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord."  1 
Cor.  15:  58.  I  Thess.  4:  1,  12.  Col.  1:  9.  Eph.  4:  15.  1  Pet.  2:  2.  2  Pet.  3:  18, 
'•  Grow  in  grace  and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ — 
increase  in  the  knowledge  of  God"  etc. 

5  Michaelis'  Dogmatik,  §  165.  6  Gal.  5:  13,  14,16,19-23:6.  2. 


§  121.]  FAITH.  587 


That  the  law,  when  viewed  in  this  light,  is  not  applicable  to  us, 
and  that,  in  opposition  to  this  view  of  the  law  (^w?*?  voftov  3:  21,) 
we  are,  notwithstanding  our  guilt,  liberated  from  punishment,  and 
taught  to  expect,  ntativeiv  an  unmerited  salvation  through  grace  (v. 
^.  4:  8.  3:  22,  26,  28,  30.  4:  5.  10:  4,)  that  the  love  of  God  to 
his  obedient  Son  Jesus  is  transferred  to  the  friends  of  the  Redeemer, 
and  makes  their  imperfect  obedience  acceptable  to  God,*  all  this  we 
owe  to  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  that  blessed  Redeemer  who  has  done  so 
much  for  us.  Rom.  3:  24  etc.  10:  4.  <§>  117  etc.  This,  instead  of 
diminishing,  strengthens  our  obligation  to  strive  with  all  our  might  to 
be  conformed  to  the  will  of  our  Benefactor,  who  does  not  exact  a 
perfect  obedience  from  us,  but  requires  only  a  persevering  and  sin- 
cere zeal  to  improve  by  his  instructions  (Rom.  6:  15,  14.  7:  4,  6.  § 
119 — 121.)  But  the  Mosaic  law'^  itself,  as  well  as  the  law  of  Christ, 
was  not  given  in  order  that  men  should  or  could  by  perfect  obedi- 
ence to  it,  merit  that  eternal  salvation  promised  in  the  Gospel.^  Its 
object  was  to  prevent  the  commission  of  crimes  at  least  of  the  grosser 
kind  (1  Tim.  1:9,)  and  thereby  to  preserve  the  external  character 
and  security  of  the  Jews,  and  thus,  as  long  at  least  as  the  general 
aspects  of  their  law  were  preserved  and  publicly  obeyed,  to  make 
them  the  actual  possessors  of  the  earthly  advantages  promised  them ; 
and  at  the  same  time,  to  lead  the  more  reflecting  Israelites  to  a 
knowledge  of  their  sinfulness  (Rom.  3:  20,)  to  excite  in  their  breasts 
a  stronger  desire  for  the  grace  of  God,  and  to  serve  as  a  standard  at 
which  their  exertions  for  the  attaitiment  of  moral  excellence  should 
aim.  The  necessity  of  divine  grace  must  certainly  have  appeared 
more  evident  to  the  reflecting  Israelite,  as  th6  promise  and  threats 
of  the  Mosaic  laws  taught  him,  that  if  God  suspended  even  the  tem- 
poral prosperity  of  his  people  on  obedience  to  his  commands,  much 
more  would  their  eternal  salvation  depend  on  a  still  more  rigid  ob- 
servance of  all  his  precepts,  and  as  he  was  convinced  of  the  truth 
that  the  ceremonial  sacrifices  were  insufficient  to  prepare  him  for  the 
future  world.*  <§.  120.  111.  3.  But  as  the  Jews  in  general,  regardless 
of  their  depravity  (Luke  18:  U,)  and  relying  on  the  observance  of 
the  ceremonial  laws,  vainly  hoped  to  be  able,  by  obedience  to  the 
laws  of  Moses,  both  to  escape  punishment  and  to  obtam  future  sal- 
vation,5  and  as  they  were  induced  by  this  false  belief,  to  reject  the 
instructions  of  God  relative  to  the  salvation  offered  through  Christ, 


1  1  Pet.  2:  5.  See  §  95.  111.  4.  Compare  Melancthon's  Loci  theol.  p.  300. 

2  Gal.  3:  21,  The  law  could  not  succeed  in  efFecting  thesalvation  of  any  per- 
son otix  UvvJo  to,onou-iauu-  comp.  Ueh.  7:  19,  orJSiv  Mi.ioo^r  o  rouog.  Com- 
ment, in  loc.  note  c. 

3  On  the  Design  of  Christ's  death,  p.  444-448.  <  Ibid.  pp.  ^6-448. 

5  Gal.  4:  5.  Rom.  3.  27,  19  etc.  Matt.  19:  16-20.  Comment,  on  Hebrew,  p. 
150.  Storr  on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  446— 4&^ 


588  REFORMATION  REQUISITE  TO  SALVATION.  [bK.  V. 

and  to  the  divine  command  that  we  should  rely  on  his  merits  (Rom. 
10:  3.  «§)  120.  111.  3  ;)  the  apostle  Paul  deemed  it  necessary  to  de- 
clare that  it  is  impossible  for  fallen  man,  by  observance  of  the  law, 
to  merit  exemption  from  punishment,  or  future  salvation.  Hence, 
he  informs  them,  that  Christ  has  opened  another  and  a  better  way  to 
salvation,  a  way  of  justification,  not  by  our  own  merits,  but  by  [faith] 
reliance  on  the  merits  of  another  ;  and  that  he  had  annulled  the 
former  way,  which,  in  itself  considered,  is  indeed  good,  but  is  im- 
practicable for  sinful  man.  Rom.  10:  4  etc.  Whatever  be  the  way 
in  which  we  become  acquainted  with  the  moral  law,  whether  it  be 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  Mosaic  institution,  or  of  reason, 
or  of  the  christian  doctrines,  if  we  consider  the  observance  of  that 
law  as  the  only  condition  and  the  meritorious  cause  of  the  Christian's 
exemption  from  punishment  and  the  attainment  of  happiness,  thus 
considered,  the  moral  law  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Christian  (^ 
24.)  But  in  another  aspect  of  the  moral  law,  it  does  of  course  refer 
to  the  Christian.  It  is  through  the  aid  of  this  law,  that  we  are  to 
learn  to  see  our  depravity,  our  imperfection,  and  our  need  of  divine 
grace.  We  are,  moreover  to  make  it  the  rule  of  our  life,  the  stan- 
dard by  which  all  our  efforts  for  the  attainment  of  moral  perfection 
are  to  be  regulated.  For,  upon  this  depends,  not  only  our  attain- 
ment of  salvation  in  general,  but  also  the  particular  degree  in  which 
it  shall  be  bestowed  upon  us  ;  although  the  salvation  itself  is  a  gra- 
cious one,  and  far  transcends  our  deserts.  ^  73.  III.  1. 


SECTION    CXXII. 


Helation  between  our  reformation  and  the  attainment  of  salvation. 

From  the  preceding  discussions,  it  is  evident,  that  that  faith 
which,  to  all  those  who  have  heard  the  Gospel,  is  the  condition  on 
which  an  unmerited  salvation  is  bestowed  on  them,  cannot  even  ex- 
ist except  in  connexion  with  a  true  reformation  of  life  {§  119 — 
121.)  Hence,  it  is  not  an  objectionable  phraseology,  to  say  that 
our  salvation  depends  on  our  change  of  heart  and  reformation  of  life, 
(1)  or(2)  that  salvation  is  bestowed  on  man  in  consequence  of  his 
change  of  mind  and  reformation  of  life, (3)  or,  that  it  is  the  reward 
of  his  re  formation.  (4)  «§>  73.  But  faith,  and  the  reformation  of  life 
necessarily  connected  with  it,  which  is  certainly  the  condition  on 


*§»   122.]  FAITH   AND  JUSTIFICATION,  599 

which  an  undeserved  salvation  is  graciously  bestowed  on  man,  must 
by  no  means  be  regarded  as  the  meritorious  cause  of  this  salvation. 
Such  a  view  of  the  subject  would  be  no  less  unfounded(5)  than  ia-^ 
jurious.  <§>  73.  111.  3. 


Illustrations. 

I.  The  phraseology  above  referred  to,  is  found  in  the  following- 
passages :  Luke  24:  47.  Acts  3:  19.  26:  18.  Is.  55:  7.  Ezek.  18: 
20  etc.  Matt.  7:  21.  John  5:  29.  Gal.  6:  7—9.  Heb.  12: 14.  See 
the  work  on  the  Design  of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  378  etc,  677 
etc. 

II.  So  certainly  may  our  salvation  be  said  to  depend  on  our  re- 
pentance and  reformation,  that  no  sooner  does  any  individual  devi- 
ate  from  the  condition  which  he  had  begun  to  fulfil,  or  begin  again 
to  polute  his  heart  by  sin,  than  he  forfeits  that  hope  of  salvation 
which  he  had  previously  enjoyed^  (1  Tim.  1:  19.  Gal.  3:  3,  4.  4: 
11.  5:  4,  7.  1  Cor.  10:  12.  15:  2.  Luke  22:  32.  Heb.  10:  26. 
2  Pet.  2:  20  etc.  1:  9^,)  unless  he  repents  of  his  relapse,  which  is 
indeed  difficult,  but  not  impossible.  In  Heb.  6:  4,  6,  Paul  says, 
adwaiov^  rovg  ana^  q)0)iiG{ftvT(g—naQanta6vTag  naXtv  dpaxaiviCfiv, 
i.  e.  "■  It  is  extremely  difficult,  if  one  who  has  been  instructed  in 
Christianity   falls  away,  to  bring  him  again  to  a  change  of  mind." 

III.  By  the  phrase,  "  that  salvation  depends  on  a  change  of 
heart,"  is  meant,  that  a  man  is  saved  because  he  fulfils  the  condi- 
tion on  which  salvation  is  graciously  bestowed  on  him  without  any 
consideration  of  his  own  merit.  St.  James  says  (ch.  2:  24,)  "  A 
man  is  justified  by  works,  and  not  by  faith  only."  In  the  Dissert. 
de  Epistol.  cathol.  occasione  etc.  (Note  38,)  we  have  made  the  ob- 
servation, that  this  passage  refers  to  a  righteousness  which  proceeds 
from  faith,  to  works,  egyotg,  which  are  connected  with  faith,  and 
that  a  justifying  or  saving  power  is  denied  only  to  that  faith  which 
has  no  influence  on  the  heart  and  life  [fidei  solitariae  rjng  tgya  ovx 
iX^t  V.  14,  17,  20,  26,]  to  a  cold  inefficient  assent,  which  Paul  also 
pronounces  not  to  be  a  genuine  justifying  faith  (Rom.  3:  22 — 5:  1, 
6.  See  <5.  119,  129.)  It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  declarations  of 
James  are  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  doctrines  of  Paul. 

IV.  In  the  phrase  ''  salvation  is  the  reward  of  the  Christian"  an 
unmerited,  a  gracious  reward  is  intended.  For,  it  is  an  act  of  the 
free  grace  of  God  (Rom.  6:  23,)  that  an  unmerited  salvation  is 
promised  to  guilty  and  imperfect  man,  as  the  reward  of  his  endeav- 
ours to  yield  obedience  to  the  divine  laws.  <§>  73.  111.  7. 

1  Ezek.  3:  20.  18:  24.  Heb.  10:  26-31.  2  See  §  119  111.  7. 


590  CONCLUSION.  [bk.  v. 

V.  The  proof,  that  justification  by  works,  is  a  doctrine  unfound- 
ed in  Scripture,  may  be  seen  in  <§>  118,  and  particularly  in  111.  7  ; 
and  <§>  73,  especially  111.  3. 


CONCLUSION, 
SECTION    CXXIIL 

Connexion  between  Doctrinal  and  Practical  Theology. 

Such  is  the  intimate  connexion  which  subsists  between  a  change 
of  mind  and  reformation  of  life,  and  the  attainment  of  salvation. — 
The  discussion  of  the  means  by  which  this  necessary  and  salutary 
change  is  to  be  effected,  as  well  as  of  the  specific  prescriptions  of  the 
christian  law,  with  which  our  thoughts  and  actions  ought  daily  to  be 
brought  into  greater  harmony,  properly  falls  within  the  limits  of  Prac- 
tical Theology.  Hence,  these  subjects,  as  well  as  some  others 
which  were  formerly  discussed  in  Doctrinal  Theology,  are  not  com- 
prehended within  the  limits  of  this  Elementary  Work, 


INDEX    OF    TEXTS. 


MORE    OR    LESS    FULLY    EXPLAINED    IN    THIS    WORK. 


Chap.    Verse. 
I. 


Genesis. 


"    26—28 
II.     1—4 
III.     1,-14 

7,  11 

1,  etc.  , 


Vj 


IV. 
V. 


Exodus. 
III.     14,  etc. 
XX.     11 


page. 

233,  236 
236,  337 
.  340 
237 
343 
345 
348 
341 


221 
363 


VI. 


II. 

LI. 

CIV. 

ex. 


Deuteronomy. 
4 


229 


Psalms. 


.     422 

.     347 

.     324 

425,  497,  note 


Isaiah. 


XLIV.     8 
XLV.     5,  6,  18 


Ezekiel. 
XII.     10 

Matthew 
I.     1  etc,        .\ 
"     18,20        - 
III.     15 
*'     17 
V.     17— J  9 
"22 

VII.  22,  23  . 

VIII.  17 


226 
226 


537 


Choj). 

Verse. 

page. 

li 

28  etc.  . 

.     329 

IX. 

6 

.     Ill 

X. 

19,  20  . 

127,    129 

(( 

23        . 

.     497 

i( 

29 

.     255 

XI. 

2—5    . 

.     117 

(( 

20 

.      Ill 

(( 

27 

.     266 

XII. 

26 

.     329 

(( 

27 

.     120 

(< 

28 

.     329 

(( 

38—42 

.      112 

XIII. 

8,23    . 

.     375 

(( 

38,  41,  43 

.     566 

XVI. 

1,4      . 

;  .   112 

(( 

19 

'     .132 

(( 

28        . 

.     438 

XIX. 

4 

.     341 

XX. 

28        .        . 

.     457 

XXII. 

14 

.     400 

XXIV. 

30 

.     386 

XXVI. 

26,  28, 

457,  535, 

537, 

543 

f( 

41 

.    351 

K 

64 

.    386 

XXVIII.  18 

.    427 

(( 

19 

.     292, 527 

(( 

20 

.    489 

.     415 

.     417 

.    449 

.    524 

159,  507 

361  note 

.     Ill 

123,  122 


Mark. 

I.  15 

III.  23 

IV.  28 
VITI.  11,  12 

IX.  38,39 

X.  14, 15 

XIII.  11 
it  32 

XIV.  22,24 


.    580 

21 

493,  495 

112,  114 

.      57 

.  395 
127,  131 
428,  535 

.     542 


IV 


5S« 

INDEX 

OF  TEXTS. 

Luke. 

1      X. 

18 

.    343 

I.     1,2 

.      96 

" 

28—30 

266 

"    32 

.     165 

1 

34—36 

160 

11.     30 

.     414 

!            " 

88 

280 

"     40,  47, 

52     .         .     428 

XL 

15 

113 

"     49 

.    431,  432 

1           ^' 

41,42 

113 

III.     23  etc 

.    415 

(( 

51,52 

474 

IV.     1,14 

.    432 

XII. 

26 

441 

XL     29,30 

.     112 

(( 

32 

377 

XVI.     22 

.    325 

(< 

40,41 

290 

x:viiL   7 

.     497 

XIII. 

19 

282 

"      14 

.     343 

t( 

20 

132 

XX    38 

.     129 

XIV. 

11 

110 

XXL    14,15 

.     465,  470 

(( 

12 

112 

(( 

16,  26 

.     126,  129 

Jo 

HN. 

<l 

28 

.     279,  438 

I.     1—3 

.     265,  287 

XV. 

24 

.     113 

"     3,10 

233,  241,  276 

(( 

26,27 

.      123,  128,  132 

''     15,30 

.     262 

XVI. 

8,10 

.      464,568 

'•     14 

.     414 

(( 

11 

.     329 

"    29 

.     459 

« 

13—15 

.     129,  130 

"    52 

.429 

XVII. 

3 

.    225,  279 

IL    11 

.    434 

(( 

4 

.    441 

HI.    5 

.     i  .     136 

it 

5,  24 

.    264 

"     7,8 

.    557 

C( 

11 

.    485 

"     16 

.     428 

t( 

20 

.    559 

"     19  21 

.     181,  182 

<( 

26 

.445 

"     34 

.    432 

XVIII. 

37 

.     441 

IV.    23,24 

.    219 

XIX. 

11 

.    432 

"     48 

.     112 

<( 

36 

.     156,  157 

V.     19,-21 

.    279 

XX. 

23 

.     502 

"    21,— 2S 

.    373 

(( 

28 

.    284,  286 

"    23 

.    269 

'*    26 

.    418 

"    27 

.    386 

Ac 

;ts. 

''    36 

.     110 

L 

24 

.    267,273 

"    39 

.     157 

II. 

36 

.     422 

VI.     46 

.    267 

IV. 

11,  12 

.    384 

"    51  etc  . 

.     543, 540 

V. 

31 

.     385 

''    63        . 

.     422 

VII. 

8 

.    537 

"    64 

.    500 

i,( 

59,  60  . 

.     273 

VIL     17 

.     107 

XVI. 

16—18  . 

.    332 

"     18 

.     108 

XVII. 

26,  27  . 

.    205 

VIII.  14 

.     105 

(( 

28 

.    237,  338 

"    28 

.     107,  269 

XIX. 

3—5      . 

.    513 

"     31 

.     182,  560 

XX. 

21 

.     197 

"    44 

.     328 

XXI. 

4 

.     145 

"    50 

.     480 

XXIIL 

5 

.     128 

"    58 

.    262 

XXVL 

16 

.     136 

IX.     34 

.    3481 

(( 

23 

489 

INDEX    OP   TEXTS. 

593 

Romans.                     I 

(( 

17,  18.        .        .    511 

I. 

4          .        .         .     426 1 

XI. 

7 

.    342 

<( 

5 

.     583 1 

(( 

24,25  . 

.    537,  543 

(( 

7 

.    274 

(( 

26 

.    582 

« 

17 

.    567 

XII. 

3 

.    248 

n 

19,  20  . 

.     191 

<( 

8 

.     589 

II." 

12,-16 

.    354 

(( 

9,10    . 

.    253 

III. " 

23 

.     340 

XIII. 

7 

145,  273 

(< 

25,  26  . 

390,  458 

XIV. 

29 

.     145 

IV. 

4 

.    572 

XV. 

12—16 

.    436 

<( 

5,6,  11 

.    567 

(( 

24,  25 

.    370 

V. 

5 

.    558 

(( 

28 

.    281 

u 

10 

.    454 

(( 

29        . 

.     379 

<( 

12 

.    348 

(( 

44 

342, 372,  541 

{< 

18 

347,  355 

(( 

52 

.    372 

(( 

19 

.     447 

• 

VI. 

1—11 

.    458 

VII. 

13 

.    351 

2  Corinthians. 

(( 

18,25  . 

.     351 

I. 

18,  19  .        ...    220 

VIII. 

2 

.    352 

<( 

24 

.     504 

(( 

3,4 

.     459 

II. 

5-li 

.    328 

(( 

9—11,  15,  U 

),26.     370 

(( 

17 

.     137 

t( 

10 

.     367 

IV. 

6 

.     196 

<c 

19    23 

366,  374 

V. 

2-4 

.    371 

(( 

28—30 

.     367 

(( 

15 

.    458,  577 

<( 

34 

.    478 

(( 

17 

.     577 

IX. 

5 

.     285 

l( 

18 

.        .462 

t( 

15—18 

.    409 

(C 

19 

54,  137 

X. 

4 

.    542 

CI 

21 

.    349 

(( 

9—14  . 

.    540 

VII. 

9,  10 

.     146,578 

XIII. 

1—10    . 

.    272 

VIII. 

9 

.    429 

XV 

13 

.     555 

XI. 

17 

.     139,  143 

.A.  V  . 

XII. 

8,9 

.    273,  498 

1  Corinthians. 

I. 

2          ...    274 

II. 

8 

.    420 

Galatians. 

(( 

10 

.     301 

II. 

11,  etc.                       133 

<( 

III. 

IV. 

V. 

VII. 

VIII. 

(( 
<( 

IX. 
X. 

<< 

i.\f 

13 

14 

6,7 

23 

4,5 

3—5 

25 

3 

4—6 

6 

8,9 

4, 

16—22 

.'    29 

.  137 
.  352 
.  554 
.  439 
.  267 
.    495 

.  137,  138 
.  560 
.    238 

6,  278,  281 
.  154 
.  289 
.    538 

ti 
a 
(< 

III. 

(( 
(( 
(( 
(( 
(< 

IV. 

(( 

V. 

(( 

14-19 

19 

20,21 

8 

11 

13 

16 

24 

27 

4,5. 

21  etc  . 

5 

12 

.     474 

.     459 

347,  455,  572 

.     155 

.    573 

.    459 

.     155 

.    580 

.    522 

.    428,  474 

.     155 

.    573,  568 

.505 

75 

>94 

INDEX 

OF   TEXTS. 

Ephesians. 

(( 

16,  17  . 

273,  361 

I. 

4,   5     . 

.     409 

(( 

10 

.     481 

1  Timothy. 

(( 

17,  18  . 

.     366 

I. 

17 

240,  378 

(( 

19,  20  . 

.     370 

II. 

6 

.    457 

(( 

21,22.         . 

425,  426 

III. 

16  121  note  261,  436  438 

(( 

23 

.     481 

VI. 

16. 

227,  378 

II. 

3 

.     351 

(< 

10 

.    327 

2  Timothy. 

II. 

17 

.     489 

III. 

14  etc. 

160,  164 

III. 

16 

.     554 

IV. 

14,  17,  18  274 

,  363,  362 

IV. 

9 

.     435 

(( 

12,  13  . 

380,  492 

Titus. 

V. 

13,  14  . 

.    578 

II. 

7 

.     .507 

(( 

26 

512,  524 

(( 

8 

.    504 

VI. 

4 

.     526 

tc 

11—14 

.     455 

(( 

12 

327,  328 

III. 

5          .      365,  523,  577 

Philippians. 

Philemon. 

I. 

18 

.    508 

verse     5,  6 

279,  578 

II. 

6 

.    429 

<( 

7,8,     . 

.     429 

Hebrews. 

<< 

10 

.    425 

I. 

2,  3,  10 

278,  279 

(C 

10,  11  . 

.     271 

it 

3 

153,  .366 

II. 

12,  13  . 

.    554 

it 

6 

271,  327 

III. 

9 

566,  569 

it 

7 

.     324 

it 

8 

. 

289,  420 

COLOSSIANS. 

it 

14 

325 

,  326,  481 

I. 

16        . 

240,  263 

II. 

8 

.     382 

(( 

17 

.     265 

(( 

14       . 

.     329 

(( 

18 

.    481 

V. 

5,7 

.     444 

(( 

19 

.     418 

VI. 

4,6 

.     560 

i( 

20 

.     379 

VII. 

2 

.     478 

II. 

9 

.     579 

it 

12 

.     473 

« 

14,  16 . 

329,  470 

tc 

25 

381,  478 

(( 

19 

488,  554 

VIII. 

28 
3 

.     444 
.     444 

1.  Thessalonians. 

IX. 

14 

445,  455 

I. 

1 

.     485 

it 

15        . 

391,  452 

II. 

13 

.    555 

it 

16,  17 

447,  480 

<( 

14        . 

.     485 

a 

23 

379,  464 

III. 

11,  12  . 

.    273 

ti 

25,26 

.     390 

IV. 

14 

.     377 

it 

X. 

28 

7 

.     459 
423  note. 

2 

5.  Thessalonians. 

it 

19—22 

445,  523 

I. 

1 

.    485 

XI. 

1 

.     581 

(( 

7 

.     322 

'i 

3 

.     233 

it 

10 

.     366 

(I 

5 

.     .397 

<( 

11 

.     409 

" 

16 

.    522 

II. 

13         .     342, 

213,  409 

" 

40 

. 

.    372 

INDEX  OP  TEXTS. 

595 

XII. 

23 

368,  378 

III. 

5,  7     . 

232,  361,  375 

(( 

28 

376,  381 

(( 

7,10     . 

.    375 

XIII. 

10        . 

.    535 

<< 

15,20,21     . 

363,558 

1  John 

I. 

1 

.    227 

James. 

(( 

7  etc.     . 

.    352,353 

I. 

18 

.    554 

II. 

1    • 

.     353, 478 

II. 

8 

.     152 

III. 

2 

.    377 

(( 

24 

.    570 

<( 

6,9      . 

.    353 

'     IV. 

5 

.     152 

IV. 

17 

.    443,554 

(( 

9,  10    . 

.    565 

V. 

6 

.    246  note. 

V. 

15 

.    495 

(( 

9 

.     125 

tt 

16 

.    495 

1  Peter. 

It 

18 

335,  353,  465 

I. 

15,  16 

229,  342 

(< 

20 

.    285 

(( 

22 

.    556 

II. 

9          ... 

377  note. 

JUDE 

(( 

12 

.     495 

verse 

1 

.485 

it 

24 

.     458 

(< 

6 

.     327, 363 

III. 

17,  18  . 

.    443 

(< 

20 

.    556 

(( 

18—20 

449,  457 

1 

It 

19 

435  note. 

Revelation. 

tc 

21         .      294, 522,  540 

III. 

12 

.    376,378 

IV. 

1 

.     458 

IV. 

11 

.    233 

ti 

6 

.     393 

1         V. 

8—14  . 

.     363, 272 

1   XIV. 

10,  11  . 

.     360, 363 

2  Peter. 

1                '' 

13 

.    272 

I. 

3 

289,  577 

j    XIX. 

10 

.    326 

(( 

4 

.    .366,  579 

XX. 

4—6    . 

.    359 

It 

8  9      . 

.     577 

XXII 

.    9 

.    326 

It 

20,21  . 

.     157 

1 

13 

.    265 

INDEX 


OF   THE    PRINCIPAL   SUBJECTS. 


Page. 
Accommodation  of  Christ  and  his  apostles  to  Jewish  pre- 
judices, disproved 153 — 154 

in  regard  to  the  authority  of  the  Old  Testament 

Scriptures  ......  153 

in  regard  to  the  existence  and  works  of  evil  spirits  340 

in  regard  to  atonement,  ....  466,  467 

Adam — his  primitive  state,  apostasy,  and  its  consequen- 
ces . 339—345 

—  The  Second  Adam,  in  what  sense  Christ  is  so  366,  389,  449 
Advent^The  second,  visible,  of  Christ  .  .  383,  389 
Anger  of  God  {o^yri) — import  of  the  term  .  .  214,  358 
Angels— good 322,326 

—  bad,  or  evil  spirits 326 

—  practical  importance  of  the  doctrine  concerining  evil 

spirits      ........  334 

Anthropomorphismus      .*....  .         214 

Antkropopathic  language  of  God    ....     214,219,456 

Antilegomenon — application  of  the  word  ....      24 

genuineness  of  the  antilegomena  .         .      61 

Apocali/pse,  its  genuineness  ......       61 

Apocryphal  hooks — of  the  Old  Testament     .         .  .  165 

of  the  New  Testament         .         .  24, 52,  93 

Apostasy  of  man Proof,   that   the   Devil   was   con- 
cerned in  it  .         .         .         .         .     ^    .       328, 343, 

Apostles,  their  authority  as  teachers  .         .      '   .         .         125 

Ascension  of  Christ  .......         434 

Atonement         .         .         .         .         .         .         .•        .        443 — 473 

Attributes  of  God.     See  God. 

^MMor%  of  Holy  Scripture         ......       176 

Backsliding  in  religion        ......  588 

Baptism — a  perpetual  ordinance  of  Christ    ...  511 

immersion  not  essential  to  it,  though  originally  prac- 
tised on  account  of  the  prevailing  customs  of  that  age  513 

Calling — direct  by  the  Gospel — import  of  the  words  y.uX^tv 

^Xrjoig,  xkijTog  398 

-  indirect,  by  conscience       .         .         .  187,  202,  395,  398 
€anoJh  of  the  New  Testament            .             .  .  24—87 


INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS.  507 


—  ofthe  Old  Testament  .-  .  .165 
Celsus  had  knowledge  ofthe  books  of  the  New  Test.  .  17 
Children— ihe'ix  depravity            .             .             .             ^  345 

and  its  consequences,  .  .  353 

;       -; removed  by  Christ,  .  394^  449 

€%m#,  his  Divinity, importance  of  this  doctrine  .   '  260 

his  supernatural  conception  291,345,413 

—  his  humanity  .  .  '        *  4J3 

—  his  sinlessness  ,  .  .  .  .  345 

—  the  restorer  offallen  man      ....    365  403 

—  and  the  sole  author  of  our  salvation  .  .  '382 

—  Origin  and  import  of  the  name  CAm^  .  .  421 
Church — the  visible  church — the  visible  and  invisible  dis- 
tinguished            .....  484,  498 

Comforter^  0  naouxkrjiog  .  .  .  .  125 

Coming  of  Christ.     See  Advent. 

Communion,  with  its  Appendix  .  .  510, 531, 534 

—  private  communion  not  to  be  absolutely  rejected  .       531 
Conditions  of  salvation.     See  Salvation. 

Conscience  teaches,  that  there  is  a  God  .     •        .  187 

Contrition  .  .  .  .  ^         .  .  578 

Conversion  .  .  .  .         ,  .  575 

Covmant — the  new,  its  sanction  is  the  blood  of  Christ  .     466 

The  old  and  the  new  distinguished         .  .  472 

Creation,  why  gradual         .....      232,  236 

Creation  of  the  first  men  .  .  .         .     339 

Damnation.     See  Punishment. 

1>«7/ of  judgment  ....  369—383 

Death a  consequence  of  the  apostasy  and  original 

sin  .  .  .  .         538—345,353 

—  The  second  de^ih{dftn fgog{) a V ax og)  .  .      358 

—  Death  to  Christians  is  no  longer  a  punishment  .       366 

—  Death  of  Jesus — how  far  its  being  voluntary  proves 

the  divinity  of  his  mission  .  105,  466 

—  an  essential  part  of  his  plan  .  .  v      440 

—  primary  object  of  it  ,  .  .         449—466 

—  collateral  objects  of  it  .  .  .  .      472 

—  exhibits  his  obedience  to  God  .  .  .      448 

—  is  an  evidence  of  the  love  of  God  .  .  .      456 

—  and  of  the  justice  of  God  .         .  .  460,467 

—  Vicarious  death  of  Christ — See  Punishment  and  Sat- 

isfaction. 
Decree  or  purpose  of  God,  in  regard  to  the  salvation  of  men 

(consilium  gratiae)  ....     364 

—  It  is  general  but  conditional  (voluntas  antecedens  et 

consequens)  .  •       389, 392, 408 

—  and  eternal  .  .  ►  .  •  408 
Demoniacs  were  persons  actually  beset  by  evil  spirits              .      328 

Import  ofthe  expressions,  Possession,  Going  out, 

Casting  out  of  devils  .  ...     "329 


598  INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS. 


Devil — One  spirit  only,  bears  the  name  of  Aia^oXog  or 

jLazavag  .....        326 

Discipline  (disciplina  ecclesiastica,)  .  .  .       498 

Divinity—of  Christ's  doctrine  .  .  102,  109,  434 

—  of  the  doctrines  of  the  apostles  .  .  125, 134 

—  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  .  .  142,  146 

—  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament     .  .  .        151 

—  of  the  Christian  religion,  confirmed  by  personal  expe- 

rience .....  180 

Earth,  is  to  be  renovated  and  become  the  abode  of  glorified 

men 369 

Ecclesiastical  rights  and  privileges  .  .  .  503 

Effects  of  grace.     See  Grace. 

Elect  {^xUxcot) — various  meanings  of  the  term  .  408 

Election  .....  403 

£wrf  of  the  world  .....  369 

Egya  Jesu — are  Christ's  miracles  .  .  .  109 

Eschatology  (novissima)  .  .  .  353, 383, 481 

Eternity  ot  God,  .  .  .  .  .  227 

Eucharist.     See  Lord's  Supper. 

Evil — Permission  of  moral  evil  ....  254 

—  and  of  physical  ....      212, 214 

—  Evil  exists  only  in  the  present  life  .  .  369 
Eusebius  testifies  to  the  authenticity  of  the  homologoumena 

of  the  New  Testament  .  .  .  .24 

—  his  classification  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 

and  his  New  Testament  canon  .  .         .  24 

■ —     his  testimony  concerning  the  Apocalypse         .         .         .61 

Exaltation— Christ's  state  of  .  .  421,  434,  477 

Faith — constituent  parts  of  (knowledge,  assent,  trust)  .         564 

—  its  connexion  with  a  reformation  .  .  576 
— ;     Faith,  general  (in  the  doctrines  of  Christ  in  general,) 

and  particular  (in  the  doctrines  of  grace)  .         582 

—  It  is  not  the  meritorious  ground  of  salvation  .  570 
Fall  of  m  an .     See  Apostasy . 

Felicity  of  men  in  the  coming  world  .  .    366, 383,  481 

—  greatness  of  it  ....  43,366 

—  proof  that  it  commences  immediately  after  death  338 

—  has  no  mixture  of  pain  ....      336 

—  Degrees  of  it  .  .  .  .380 

—  its  eternal  duration       .....     380 

—  a  participation  in  the  blessedness  of  Christ       .  .     382 

—  Our  felicity  consummated  at  the  resurrection  ,    383 

—  The  conditions  of  it  .  390,395,442,508,588 
Flesh  ((iugl)  frequently  denotes  the  native  depravity  of  man  350 
Forgiveness  of  sin.     See  Remission. 

Freedom  of  man  .  .  .  .  .     350 

Genealogy  of  Jesus        ......     412 

Genuineness  of  the  homologoumena  of  the  New  Testament  24 

6^orf— his  existence      .....      188—205 


INDEX  OP  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS. 


509 


—  biblical  idea  of  God 

—  his  attributes 
Goodness  of  God 


The  writers  of  the  Old  Testament  well  acquainted 
with  the  goodness  of  God 


206 

206—228 
212 


260 


Gospel,  in  the  broad  sense  (the  doctrines  of  Christ  in  gener- 
al,) and  in  the  limited  sense  (the  doctrines  of  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  through  the  death  of  Christ)  582 

—  Genuineness  of  the  Four  Gospels  .  .  25—60 
Government  of  the  world             .....     239 

by  the  immediate  agency  of  God       .  .       240 — ^253 

by  the  laws  of  nature  ....     254 

Grace — salvation,  the  gift  of  God's  grace         .  .  .     403 

—  Influences  of  grace  .  .  553 — 563 

—  ascribed  to  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost        553 

—  cannot  be  proved  from  experience  .  .  558 

—  possibility  of  them  ....  558 

—  consistent  with  human  liberty       .  .  .     558, 562 
Happiness.     See  Felicity. 

Heathen— how  they  ma}'  attain  to  the  knowledge  of  God  202 

—  may  be  saved  through  Christ  .  .  398 — 407 
Heavens — approaching  change  of  them 
Hebrews — Paul  the  author  of  the  Epist.  to  the  Heb. 

—  The  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  contained  the  original 

text  of  Matthew's  Gospel 

Hell — descent  of  Christ  into 

Heretics,  value  of  their  testimony  respecting  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  homologoumena  of  the  N.  Test. 

High  Priest — Priestly  office  of  Christ,  explained 

Holiness  of  God  ..... 

Homologoumena  of  the  N.  Test. — what  books  belong  to 

Import  of  this  terra 

Humiliation  of  Christ 

Its  object  .... 

Illumination  .  .  .  .  • 

Image  of  God  ... 

Immortality — of  God  .... 

of  man,  originally,  in  regard  to  his  body 

Evidence  of  the  immortality  of  the  human  soul 

Immutability  of  God  .  .  .  • 

/m;?M^«^zon  of  righteousness  (uprightness) 

of  Christ's  righteousness 

Incomparable  excellence  of  God  (dyioi-ng  cnj?) 
Independence  of  God  ... 

//jy?m7y  of  God  (infinitas,  immensitas) 
Influence  of  divine  grace.  See  Grace. 
Inspiration — import  of  the  word  dionvevaiog 

of  the  New  Testament 


369 
61 

25 
434 

54-60 

443,  450 

214,  228 

.     25 

25—27 

427,  430 

427,  479 

.    558 

.    389 

.     227 

.    339 

.    353 

219,  227 

.    564 

.     569 

.    228 

223,228 

.     228 


.     151 
142— J50 


how  consistent  with  the  exercise  of  their  own  fac- 


600  INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS. 


ulties  by  the  writers         .  .  .         142 — 146 

does  it  extend  to  the  historical  parts  of  the  New 

Testament?  .  .  .  .         .      146 

ofthe  Old  Testament  ...  151 

/w/f^n7;/ of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  .  .     87 

"   and  ofthe  Old  Testament       .  .  .  .  165 

Intercession  of  Christ  with  God,  denotes  his  efficiency  in 

heaven  for  our  good  ....  476 

Interpretation  of  scripture — moral         .  .  .  .176 

Israelites — why  God  gave  a  revelation  to  them  only       .        396,  398 

Transfer  of  their  designations  to  Christians  .       484 

James  the  younger,  an  apostle,  wrote  the  Epist.  of  James  61 

Jerome — his  testimony  for  the  Apocalypse  .  .  72 

and  for  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  .  .  75 

John — why  the  Alogians  rejected  his  Gospel  .  .  60 

—  its  doctrinal  and  controversial  object  .  146,  419 

—  he  had  the  other  three  Gospels  before  him  when  he 

wrote  his  .  .  ^  .  .  .        146 

—  Genuineness  of  the  2d  and  3d  Epistles  of  John  .  83 
Josephus — his  testimony  concerning  Christ               .             .  17 

Jude,  the  apostle genuineness  of  his  Epistles      .  .  85 

Judas,  the  traitor,  a  witness  for  Christ's  miracles     .  .         109 

Judgment,  the  final,  at  the  resurrection         .  .  .         383 

described  ....  380,481 

Justice  o^  God  .  .  .  .  .  .214 

Jusiijication  .....  565, 570 

Justin  the  Martyr his  Gospel  ...  36 

—  his  testimony  for  the  Apocalypse       ...  66 
King — Kingly  office  of  Christ  (officium  regium)          421,  477,  494 

its  eternal  duration  ....        434 

Kingdom  of  heaven — the  residence  ofthe  blessed  .  369 

Law — Import  ofthe  term  in  various  passages  ofthe  N.  T.  403 

—  The  Mosaic  law  abrogated  by  the  death  of  Christ  472 

—  Objects  of  this  law  ....  582 

—  The  law  of  Christ  ....  585 

—  Freedom  of  Christians  from  law  .  .  587 
Life  eternal.     See  Felicity. 

Long-suffering  of  God  .....      214 

Lord — in  what  sense  Christ  is  said  to  be  Lord 

{y.vgiog)  ....     237,260,280 

—  See  King. 

Love  of  God  .....  212,228 

Luke — Origin  of  the  report,  that  Paul  had  a  hand  in  Luke's 

Gospel  .  .  .  .  .     '       57 

—  Luke's  Gospel  corrupted  by  Marcion 

—  Credibility  of  both  Luke's  histories  .  .  94 

—  and  their  authority  .  ...  .  146 
Man — Origin  and  state  of  the  first  men     .             .             .           338 

and  their  fall  .  .343 


INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS.  601 


Jkfarcion — whether  he  corrupted  the  Epistles  of  Paul  and  the 

Gospel  of  Luke  .  57-_64^  88 

Mark — indications  in  his  Gospel,  that  he  was  a  follower  of 

Peter  .....  49 

-  he  wrote  it  under  the  inspection  of  Peter        .  94,  146 

-  and  before  the  other  Gospels  .  .  96 

-  authority  of  this  Gospel  .  .  .  .146 
Matthew — internal  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  his  Gospel         49 

-  It  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew     ,  91 

-  genuineness  of  its  two  first  chapters  90,415 
Mediator.  See  High  Priest. — Christ  is  a  mediator  ((U^aui??)  465 
Merit — salvation  not  merited  by  good  works         .         403,  564,  570 

-  the  merit  of  Christ  .  .  445,  449—465,  570 
Messiah — proof  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah  promised  in  the 

Old  Testament  ....  420 

Miiavoia — import  of  the  word  575 — 576 

JJfims^crs  of  the  Gospel  ....         491,503 

Miracles — idea  of  the  biblical  miracles  •  .    243 

of  Christ — their  historical  credibility  .  .       33 

proceeded  from  divine  power,  and  prove  the  divinity 

of  Christ's  mission  and  doctrine        .  109,  245,  5133 

Jesus  himself  appealed  to  his  miracles  as  proof  of 

his  divine  mission  ....      101 

why  he  sometimes  forbade  their  publication     .         .110 

The  possibility  of  miracles  105,  240 

Miracles  of  the  apostles  .  .  .      142,  492 

The  miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  confirm  our 

beliefofthebeingofaGod  .  .    202 

Miracles  are  proofs  of  divine  power  .  •        208 

whether  a  preformation  in  nature  is  the  cause  of 

miracles  .  .  .  •  •         ^43 

Absolute  and  relative  miracles  .  •  "45 

Miraculous  Faith  .  .  .  •  •  -^^ 

Moses — authority  of  Moses'  writings  .  '        J^q 

The  Mosaic  dispensation,  or  economy  .  4/ J 

Nature.     See  Physical  Theology. 

-  Natures  of  Christ.     See  Christ,  and  Personal 

iVecess%  of  the  being  of  God  .  •  'r^A^r 

Obedience  oiChxhi  .....       428,439,440 

-  active  and  passive  distinguished 

-  its  effects  .  .  .  445,448,450,569 

-  new  obedience  results  from  repentance  and  faith  575,  582 
O^cc— offices  of  Christ  (officia. )     See  King,  High  Priest 

and  Prophet. 
Old  Testament.     See  Testament.  ^^    ^^^ 

Omnipotence  of  God  .  .  •  .         ■  , 

Omnipresence  of  God  .  .  ••  •        ^^ 

Omniscience  of  God  .  •  •  •  ' 

Orrfcr  or  method  of  salvation.     See  Salvation. 
Origen— his  testimony  of  the  authenticity  of  the  homologou- 
76 


GO'i  INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS. 


mena  .  .  .  .  .25,27 

and  of  the  Apocalypse  .  .  .  .61 

his  testimony  concerning  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 

brews .  .  .  ...  75 

Original  8'm  .....  345 — 353 

Paul  clothed  with  divine  authority  .  .  .  134 

-  his  call  to  the  apostleship  .  .  .  139 
Pedobaptism — proper,  and  doubtless  derived  from  the  apostles,    525 

Objections  answered  .  .  .  527 

People  of  God — a  designation  of  Jews  and  Christians  .  486 
Permiysion  of  evil  .....  255,  408 
Persons  in  the  Trinity — import  of  the  phrase  .  297 — 312 
PfeT.sonrt'/ distinctions  in  the  Godhead  .  .  .  295 
Personal  union  of  two  natures  in  Christ,  and  the  attri- 
bution of  the  properties  and  acts  of  either  to  the 

other  .....  419 

Peter — his  second  Epistle  ....     100 

Phi/sical  Theology  .  .  .  .  .         .     193 

Plan  pursued  by  Jesus,  proves  the  divinity  of  his  mission         .     105 
Porphyry  was  acquainted  with  the  books  of  the  N.  Test.         .       20 

Prac^ica/ Theology 187—201 

Prayer  .  .         .  .  ...     250 

Predestination    .  ......     408 

Prescience  or  foreknowledge  of  God             .             .  .         208 
Presence  of  the  bodv  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  sacred  sup- 
per      '     534—552 

Preservation  of  the  world  by  God         .  .  .         .         237 

PropAcc/es  in  the  Old  Testament         .  .  .         .         156 

are  proof  of  the  divine  prescience     .  .         .         209 

Prophecies  uttered  by  Christ  .  .  211,594 

Prophecies  in  the  O.  T.  concerning  the  Messiah  421 

Propitious — in  what  sense  the  death  of  Christ  rendered  God 

propitious  to  men  .  .  .  .       462 

Prophet — proper  idea  of  a  prophet  .  .  .157 

Prophetic  office  of  Christ  .  .  .       440 

Protestantism  ......      503 

Providence  of  God 337,259 

particular  or  special  .  .  .  239 

most  particular  (specialissinia)         .  .  487 

in  regard  to  the  evil  of  the  world     .  .  255 

Punishment  does  not  always  denote  suffering  for  personal 

demerit  ....  353,459 

360 
360 
360 
360 
361 
449_467 


positive 

future 

degrees  of  it     . 

commences  immediately  after  death 

and  will  be  eternal 

Christ  has  freed  us  from  it 

Vicarious  punishments  explained         .  .  460 

was  suitable  and  just  in  the  case  of  Christ  .     464 


Purpose.     See  Decree  of  God. 


INDEX  OP  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS.  603 


Reason — revelation  consistent  with         .  .  .  179 

-  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  also  .  .      30G 312 

Reconciliation  of  God  with  men  .  .  .      456 452 

Redeemer  {amtri^)  or  Saviour a  title  given  to  God  .     413 

and  to  Christ  •  •  .  .  .     413 

How  far  Christ's  higher  nature  was  concerned  in 

man's  redemption  .  *  .  .     431 

Reformation  was  not  the  immediate  object  of  Christ's  death         453 

but  a  remote  object  ....     454 

it  is  not  the  efficient  or  meritorious  cause  of  the 

pardon  of  sin  ....      403,454 

how  it  is  promoted  by  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  dying 

for  our  salvation  .  .  407,  456,  466,  575 

Reformation  is  the  consequence  of  faith  575,  582 

it  is  necessary  to  salvation,  but  not  the  merito- 
rious ground  of  it  .  .  .  .       398 

Regeneration  ......       575 

i2c/a^2ow  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  to  reason  .  306  etc. 

Religion — etymology  of  the  word,  and  the  origin  of  the  thing      189 

natural  religion,  or  religion  of  reason  .        187 — 201 

revealed  religion.     See  Revelation. 

Remission  of  punishment,  not  inconsistent  with  divine  justice      464 

remission  or  forgiveness  of  sins,  the  primary  object 

of  Christ's  death  ....       449 

what  it  is  .  .  .  .  .        450 

how  designated  in  the  scriptures  .  .         449 

forgiveness  of  sins  through  Christ's  death,  not  lim- 

ited to  the  sins  committed  by  Jews  and  Pagans 

before  their  conversion  to  Christianity  .         266 

forgiveness  of  sins  and  justification,  synonymous  569 

Renovation  [avaxutvwaig)  ....  576 

12cpen^«wcc  of  God,  an  anthropopathic  expression  .  221 

of  men  for  their  sins  .  .  .  579 

Reprobation  ......        408 

Resurrection — of  Jesus — was  real  .  .  .  116 

distinctly  foretold  by  him  .  .  .       105 

ascribed  both  to  the  Father  and  to  the  Logos  430 

is  a  vindication  and  confirmation  of  his  doctrines 

and  particularly  of  his  promise  of  eternal  life  435 

of  the  dead — of  the  wicked  .  .  •    358 

of  all  men  .  .  •  •  370 

Reply  to  Kant's  objections  to  the  resurrection  of 

the  body  .  .  .  /  •         371 

The  language  of  Christ  concerning  the  resurrec- 
tion, is  not  to  be  taken  figuratively  .  .    373 

Christ  will  raise  the  dead  .  .  •       383 

Revelation.— The  Old  and  New  Testaments  contain  a  reve- 
lation in  the  strict  sense  .  .  102 — 145 

■-    Possibility  of  a  revelation  .  .  •  245 

History  of  various  divine  revelations  202,  396 


604  INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS. 


Condition  of  those  not  favoured  with  divine  rev- 

elation .....  398 

The  revelation  which  God  gave  by  Jesus  Christ 

is  the  most  perfect  ....      432 

Reward — How  far  the  future  felicity  of  man  is  a  reVi^ard  of 

his  repentance  .  .  .  403,  588 

Rights  of  churches,  and  of  the  civil  power  .  .  503 

Sacraments — of  the  New  Testament  .  .  510 — 550 

ofthe  Old  Testament  .  .  .         529 

Salvation.     See  Felicity. 

The  way  in  which  it  is  attained  .  565 — 582 

Pious  men,  who  lived  before  Christ  came,  are,  for 

his  sake,  and  since  his  removal  to  heaven,  par- 
takers of  it  .  .         .       383,389,-401,481 
Sanctijication — by  faith             .  .  .  .      575—587 

Imperfection  of  it  .  .  .  .       350 

Satan.     See  Devil. 

Satisfaction — vicarious  (satisfactio  vicaria)  .  443 — 470 

explanation  of  the  terms  .  .  .         459 

Scripture.     See  Canon,  and  Testament. 

Separation  or  secession  from  a  church             .             .  .     498 
Sin-offering — Christ  compared  to  one             .             .  .       459 
jS^iY^m^  at  the  right  hand  of  God              .             .             .  425 
Son  of  God. — Christ  is  so,  (1)  in  respect  to  his  divine  na- 
ture, or  as  the  Logos             .             .             .  295 

(2)  on  account  of  his  supernatural  conception  413 

(3)  as  a  man  most  intimately  united  with  the  Logos   417 

in  the  fullest  sense,  he  is  the  Son  of  God  by  his 

exaltation  .....       422 

Son  of  Man — import  of  the  term  .  .  .  483 

Spirit. — The  Holy  Spirit  guided  the  apostles  .  .       125 

Extraordinary  gifts  ofthe  Spirit,  possessed  by  the 

apostles  .  .  .  .134 

were  given  by  Christ  ....     489 

Divinity  and  personality  ofthe  Holy  Spirit  .        299 

Operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     See  Grace,  influences  of 

Spirituality  of  God  .  .  .  .218 

^^a^fs  of  Christ  .....       427—438 

Supper,  Holy — is  a  means  of  cementing  union  among  Christians  510 

Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Supper  and  A  pp.       531,534,345 

Whether  appointed  by  Christ  for  a  perpetual  or- 
dinance .....  532 

Symbolic — Books, — the  church  has  a  right  to  limit  her  teach- 
ers by  them  .....   503 

Symbolic  knowledge  of  God  .  .  .     216 

TertulUan — his  testimony  to  the  genuineness  ofthe  homo- 

logoumena  .  .  ...  .36 

and  of  the  Apocalypse  .  .         ;  .  .       67 

Testament — origin  ofthe  term,  and  comparison  ofthe  new 


INDEX  OP  THE  PRINCIPAL  SUBJECTS.  605 


covenant  with  a  testament  .  .  .     473 

The  New  Testament  ,  .         18 gg  142  145 

The  Old  Testament  .  .  .         150_li75 

Utility  of  the  Old  Testament  .  .  .     iqq 

Various  designations  of  it  .  .        160  165  etc 

Integrity  of  it  ....       165—175 

Division  into  books  .  .  171 J75 

Testimony — internal,  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  the  divinity  of 

the  Scriptures  ....  Iqq" 

Theocracy  ......  497 

Theodicea.     See  Evil. 

Toleration  of  various  opinions  among  the  members  of  a 

church  ....        501, 503  etc. 

Tradition  testifies  to  the  authenticity  of  the  homologoumena         25 

What  Eusebius  intends  by  tradition  .  .         29 

Trinity — doctrine  of  ....         260 305 

not  contrary  to  reason  .  .  .  306 

Trust  or  confidence  in  Christ,  or  in  God  through  Christ      565,  570 
Truth  o^GoA.     See  Veracity. 

Unity  of  God  ......      223 

Universality  o{  6.WMiQ  gr^Lce  .  .  389,292,408 

of  the  Christian  religion  .  .  .       396 

Fcrac%  of  God  .  .  .  .  .219 

Vision  of  God  (visio  Dei)  .  .  .  377 

Wisdom  o^  God  .  .  .  .  .      191,208 

Works  of  Christ.     See  Egya. — Works  of  the  law  {tgya  i/o- 

fAOv,)  what?  ....  403 

-  do  not  merit  salvation  .  403,  570,  585,  588 

-  Good  works  are  necessary  to  salvation  .  582,  688 
World— enA  of  the  world             ....  369 

Government  of  the  world,    ^ee  Government. 

Wrath  of  God  (opy>?)— import  of  the  phrase  .  214,  358 


END. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


LfBRARV  »BF 


\W\Ht 


DHC  j  n 


'  '1962    IblTEPliaRARY  LOAN 


// 


Wt^ 


la^ 


«b<-  D  I.U 


DEC  i^^yw 


KOVSOIWb'  S 


RECEIVED 


iM 


1.C 


67  -6  P^* 


L.QAN 


DEI'T 


LD  2lA-50m-12,'60 
(B6221sl0)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


